Jump to content

f1owers

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. In a nutshell, the whole court process died a death a couple of years back. Nothing further was heard and I presumed that it had either been stayed indefinitely.... Yesterday I received a letter from a new firm of solicitors, McClure Naismith, threatening to commence proceedings unless I made arrangements to pay.... Can they do this when there were already ongoing proceedings... .. a second bite at the apple???
  2. Hi and thanks for replying. My letter to them said My Defence also contended that any agreement held by the Claimant fails to comply with S127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in that the agreement fails to contain all the required prescribed terms. Both your “true copy” of the agreement received, and the original copy of the agreement fail to mention any mention of interest rates to be applied. The documentation I have is scanned into this thread. There is the original agreement (blank overleaf). However, their "true" copy they sent through does have the back printed - again no terms; in fact the only payment instructions come under "direct debit conditions". x
  3. No terms discussed yet. I need to decided whether or not I think my case is strong enough to defend the case at a trial..... or to negotiate a settlement. x
  4. An update on how this is going. Still plodding on - witness statements due to be filed next week. Letter received from Sutcliffes today which includes "In response to your point raised in relation to interest rates, please note that all of the prescribed terms which much be included in the agreement under the Consumer Credit (Agreement) Regulaions 1983 are stated in the credit agreement already provided. The APR is not a prescribed term and therefore the debt is not unenforceable under S127 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I acknowlegde that my client has taken some time to provide all the documentation you have requested and apologise for the issues this has caused. In order to bring the matter to a conclusion and save further time and possible costs to both parties my client would like to resolve the matter and have requested I discuss the possibility of agreeing a Tomlin Order with you." Am I wrong in thinking that the interest rate is one of the prescibed terms. Anyone have any thoughts on their letter??? Thanks. Flower
  5. Thank you so much for the replies - I was beginning to think I was going to have to face this alone (with Ford!) Advice needed today on what to do next! As they have finally satisfied my S78 request - should I now issue an application for leave to file an amended Defence based on S127?? I have only just received their documentation and therefore the majority of my Defence was based on S78. I have also started to draft a letter to Sutcliffe's which will end in inviting them to withdraw the proceedings?? Dear Sirs Re: Case No XXX I refer to recent correspondence received from you in the above matter enclosing your completed Allocation Questionnaire and providing documentation which has been requested from yourselves and/or your client since June 2010. It is noted that you have provided a reconstituted agreement and have enclosed copy terms and conditions – thereby finally fulfilling your obligations under S78. At the same time I made a CCA request to your client, I also made a SAR request and within the information received from the SAR request, was a copy of my original application. It is therefore interesting to note that within these proceedings you have provided me with a reconstituted agreement as opposed to the original agreement which is clearly within your client’s possession. It is also interesting to note that the original agreement in my position, states a different account number to the one pleaded within these proceedings. The original agreement contains no prescribed terms as required by S127 of the Consumer Credit Act. As you are more than aware, Lord Nicholls in Wilson and Others v. The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (2003), recognised the importance and drastic consequences for lenders in this position but also stated that non compliance would lead automatically and inflexibility to a ban on the making of an enforcement order whatever the circumstances. In relation to the reconstituted agreement – again this is lacking prescribed terms as there is no mention of the APR to be applied. Although it may be claimed that such terms were contained within the terms and conditions provided, I am sure you are also aware that the requirements are for the prescribed terms and conditions to be within the 4 corners of the signature document – not on accompanying paperwork. So which is the best course of action - letter to Sutcliffes - application to amend...... or both?? Many thanks!!
  6. Bit worrying to hear that you lost! Did you not appeal it? Just so I can brace myself for what may be in the pipeline - once judgment was entered for YB how reasonable were they on terms of repayment?? x
  7. Hi Paul and thanks for replying to me. What happened with yours in the end as your agreement is identical to the one I have - from SAR request (the one with a different account number to the proceedings). This new agreement that they have signed is different to the other one. I cannot see prescribed terms - overleaf there is are "direct debit conditions" which state a minumum payment option...... however, there is no mention of an APR this making it unenforceable?? If they are forced to rely on this agreement as being the one they have disclosed in these proceedings - are they in trouble? You know the score with the original agreement - what was on the back is a mystery! Do you think I should be entering into correspondence with Sutcliffes explaining that I think both agreements are funamentally flawed; that their conduct has been unreasonable in that they ignored all requests for documentation and only provided same at the AQ stage; and maybe invite them to withdraw? I don't understand your question over assignment.....???? Sorry! So many questions....... am really grateful for anyone casting their eyes over this and helping me! x
  8. Hi and many thanks for taking the time to reply and look at my thread. Defence was submitted - at post 42. I need to file my AQ by the end of this week. The ppi aspect I dont wish to worry about at the moment - it was cancelled years back and I did not include it as a counterclaim. The AQ seems pretty straightforward to complete. Summary: CCA made and ignored. A/c put into dispute by myself. Dispute ignored and Default received (may have been defective on dates but in light of recent case law - not enough to predjudice my position as proceedings issued well afterwards). Written request made for disclosure following issue of proceedings. Ignored. Defence filed. AQ received together with a new version of a CCA (not the same as one I previously obtained via SAR) along with terms and conditions (all posted above), Default Notice, and correspondence between me and Sutcliffes. The help I am hoping for is advice as to the application forms - the one I originally received under a SAR request, and the new version I received with the AQ on Friday. Are either of them complient enough to be enforceable? Should I be entering into more correspondence with Sutcliffe's advising that I believe their two applications to be defective?? Basically - have I got a hope here?? Thanks x
  9. And your help is very much appreciated! The triangle that says "report post"?
  10. Pressed enter too early then. My current thoughts are if they want to rely on the new application form, their reconstitued one, there is no APR stated thus making it unforceable?? As far as my original copy of the application - there is nothing on the back of it and really it is anyone's guess as to what was there. As they have served this reconstitued agreement - do they now have to rely on that one??
  11. 20th June Any idea why I am not getting any help or advice??? x
  12. Hi Still hoping someone can help and advise me on my agreements. xx
×
×
  • Create New...