Does a document purporting to be a Deed of Assignment have to explicitly mention the account being assigned or can the Deed merely refer to a batch of accounts that are being assigned?

Additionally, what would be the effect on the Deed of Assignment if a bank mistakenly sold a loan account and an overdraft account as a single overdraft account? (hope that's clear)

In other words they rolled both into one and labelled it an overdraft.

Bump

I have a deed o ass which is 4 pages and does have no particulars of the agreement it was sent for,

regards pops

This issue is not related to my other thread.

I've now had time to read what they sent.

1. It is two separate documents

2. The first document is headed "Account Sale Agreement" and appears to be no more than an offer to sell. It lays down the conditions of the sale and even mentions that the sale will involve assignment of all rights but crucially it doesn't appear to me to be a Deed of Assignment. It ends with a summary of the account sale and states that the date of sale will be close of business on the 5/10/07 and is signed only by HSBC. Dated 5/10/07

3. The second document is an agreement between Tessera Recoveries and Marlin Recoveries and may indeed be a Deed of Assignment. Dated 12/10/07

4.Another annomally appears to be that the copy of the notice of assignment purporting to come from HSBC gives the date of assignment as the 12/10/07 which is the date of the purported assignment between Tessera and Marlin and not the date of the purported assignment between HSBC and Tessera.

Any thoughts on this one?

Anyone able to shed light on this?

What is the DOA worth.Mine only has written date dec on front then loads of tech terms with a date of 1998 when GE and CL ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT,,,Nothing refers to the agreement they sent me in dates or names ,i hope someone comes along with more info

Bump

Bump

Must be someone who knows about these DOAs

Popeye

I'm going to run mine by a Solicitor and see what they say.

Yep ,i will try the same with someone that does not charge

No news yet;

Looks like I was correct on this one.

Please tell me more

Not sure what you're after, but the following is interesting. I believe the author was a respected figure on CAG.

DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT FOR DEBTS – FURTHER INFORMATION

Many questions have arisen with regard to s.136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925).

WHAT IS A DEED?

The definition of a DEED prior to 31 July 1990 used to be a formal document (instrument) which was signed, sealed and delivered. The “Seal” also was referred to as an “Indenture” – the wax seal to the instrument. Since the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, the formalities of a DEED is that the instrument should be identified on the face of it that is a “DEED”, be signed by the person executing it and, IMPORTANTLY: “Witnessed” by another party who attests (signs) to the signature of the executing party in the presence of the witness. There are further formalities when two witnesses are required; however I suggest the requirement that the DEED be signed in the presence of at least one “Witness” who also signs the DEED is particularly relevant to matters discussed in the forum.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEED AND A WRITTEN CONTRACT?

The difference in contract law between an “Ordinary” contract and a contract under “DEED”, is basically that the former can be actioned upon (parties can be sued for failure to perform obligations created by the terms and conditions of the contract) for up to 6 years from the date of the breach or default. Whereas regarding a contract under DEED, this period is extended to 12 years.

I suspect that many will realise that 6 years is a recurring time period for many issues, such has how long financial institutions purport to retain records, the length of time Credit Reference Agencies retain rolling records (although which I believe is an agreed period of time between agencies but not a period stipulated by any legal right to do so – which is another debatable point), the length of time a County Court Judgement remains on the records with Registry Trust Ltd etc. Moreover, under an “Ordinary” contract the 6 year time period begins at the time of default or from any later time that an ADMISSION is made, e.g. a Debtor defaults and the Creditor does nothing to pursue the debt for 5 years but then contacts the Debtor who responds by making an offer to settle which is not accepted, then in those circumstances the 6 year period begins thereafter. In the case of a contract under DEED, the 12 year period would begin thereafter.

It should be noted that an “Ordinary” contract can be required to comply with further formalities over and above a basic contract formalities at common law, such as imposed under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and, VERY IMPORTANTLY: under any subordinate legislation created under the Primary Act such as Statutory Instruments (SIs), also known as Regulations, Orders, Rules or Guidance which should always be consulted in order to understand the finer points of legislation as many thousands of SIs are enacted each year.

WHAT ARE DEEDS USED FOR?

It is a requirement that legal estates and interests in land must be granted by DEED, under s.52(1) of the LPA 1925. This is why when a house is purchased the DEED of transfer is witnessed – usually by a solicitor. The exchange of contracts is the formal service of the transfer DEEDS, the vendor signing their copy in the presence of their solicitor and the purchasers doing the same on the counterpart DEED with their solicitor / Licensed Conveyancer.

Other transactions are required to be made by DEED; a legal mortgage (s.85 LPA 1925) certain leases (s.86 LPA 1925) a charge of a legal mortgage (s.87 LPA 1925) and a DEED of arrangement when an insolvent debtor settles debts with a creditor which affects land as an alternative to the debtor declaring bankruptcy – the registration of a DEED of Arrangement warning potential purchasers of the land of the prior agreement. Also generally share dealings have formal requirements in DEEDS of transfer.

ARE DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT USED FOR THE SALE OF DEBTS?

To the best of my knowledge, I do not believe that the sale of a debt (an Assignment) is required to be made under DEED. I suggest that the term: “DEED OF ASSIGNMENT” is used in a different sense with regard to the sale of debts and I further suggest that the formal transfer of the rights under a contract, whether in default or not, could be more accurately referred to as a “DOCUMENT OF ASSIGNMENT”.

It may be that financial institutions, purchasers of debts, debt collection companies etc. might refer to a “DEED OF ASSIGNMENT” due to the archaic legal term for a debt which can be assigned as a: “Chose in Action”. Furthermore this is why the LPA 1925 is the relevant statutory provision for the assignment of debts. I understand this has caused some confusion amongst many contributors. A “Chose in Action” is an intangible right other than relating to land – such as a debt, while a “Chose in Possession” is a tangible object, such as a car, books etc. In English Law, a “Chose in Action”, or in the plural: “Choses in Action”, are now known as a: “Thing in action” or “Things in action”.

BY WHAT METHOD IS A DEBT ASSIGNED?

As I have intimated in previous postings; s.136 of the LPA 1925 sets out the requirement for the legal assignment of legal debts, “Things in action”, thus:

“136 Legal assignments of things in action

(1) Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice—

(a) the legal right to such debt or thing in action;

(b) all legal and other remedies for the same; and

© the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor”.

Again, as intimated in previous postings, I believe it is settled at common law (case law made by judges using statutory interpretation as opposed to statutory law made by politicians) that a “Legal Assignment” is completed and has full effect at the time the debtor receives the Notice of Assignment and not the date when it is sent or posted by mail.

WHAT IS THE EFFECTIVE DIFFERENCE?

In the context of the forum discussion regarding “DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT”; I suggest that a debtor who is informed that a debt has been assigned by DEED and the debtor requests a copy of said DEED as absolute proof of a legal assignment and subsequently a copy of a document of assignment is provided (although usually very begrudgingly) which enables the assignee to sue the debtor in the assignee’s own name (if the requirements of s.136 of the LPA 1925 are complied with) and it is found that the document of assignment is not a DEED as prescribed, then at the very least the debtor can plead that an incorrect statement has been made. This might have greater impact when a Statement of Truth has been filed by an assignee with the County Court in recovery proceedings and the accumulative effect with other lax practises might amount to “Unreasonable Behaviour” by an assignee litigant which can be brought to the attention of the Court.

In addition, I do not consider it unreasonable for a debtor to require confirmation of a legal assignment, particularly in the circumstances when a Notice of Assignment has not been received by a debtor – and the assignee, assignor or another party (e.g. a debt collection company) cannot produce any cogent evidence of the delivery of such a notice i.e. by Recorded or Special Delivery.

CONCLUSION

It is apparent from many postings that UK financial institutions are undertaking the bulk transfer of debts which are deemed difficult to recover, uneconomical to recover or considered unrecoverable. I suggest this trend has developed over the past few years in light of the general increased indebtedness of UK consumers and which has led to the growth and proliferation of secondary debt collection companies. Personally, I find this practice rather insidious as often when the initial collection procedures have failed and both in-house and external debt collection companies (in multiples on occasions) have not produced the required results from a debtor, who might not have the wherewithal to even make an offer of payment in discharge due to dire personal circumstances, the assignment of a debt will inevitably instigate a further tirade of communications, demands, threats etc. purely in the pursuit of profit.

Finally, I understand that when financial institutions (Principals) sell their “Book Debts” for an amount less that the face value, the remainder in loss can be “Charged Off” and the relevant tax deductions made as written off, however, in the process the credit status of debtors’ is adversely affected and Principals then canvass new business from more credit worthy customers. Furthermore, I understand that Secondary Assignee companies pursue the full balance plus and register further defaults with credit reference agencies, thus extending the 6 year period of a recorded default from the time the Document of Assignment is exchanged between assignor and assignee, but not necessarily from the date the Legal assignment has efficacy by delivery of a Notice of Assignment to the debtor. Moreover, should a Secondary Assignee fail to profit, I see no restriction on a further assignment taking place with the inevitable consequences of a further round of debt collection following. Therefore, I consider it extremely important for consumers affected by these events to present evidence in fact and in law to the relevant enforcement authorities in the public interest.

you beat me to it rosa i was going to post this

patrickq1

Thank you for the above rosa

Now if i understand it correctly Its the NOTICE of assignment and the date it is received thats needed most,

We have a purported DEED of assignment normally ok , but the deed we have has no particulars written on it about the said debt

On the last page it goes

Executed as a Deed by a partner in Ozannes,as a duly authorised attorney for GE capital bank ltd signed

Executed as a Deed by a partner in Ozannes as a duly authorised attorney

for CL finance ltd signed

BOTH signatures are the same

If ive got it right this is no proof

The following may be of interest regarding DoA

High Court Judgment Template

Some interesting issues here as I believe HSBC may have quoted wrong account numbers on many of these, I have 2 accounts that were closed with zero balances that Marlin are chasing……I do actually owe the money but not on the account numbers that show on the documentation

Also one of the accounts ,Tessera issued to Marlin and Largo, and both are chasing the money…….Now I realise what’s happened and I am having fun with the DCAs so no problems there ….but I am playing devils advocate with HSBC, because as a layman how am I supposed to know how the system works, after all I received 2 HSBC headed letters saying they had sold the debt so I am in their complaints process since January and they really don’t know how to deal with this

However one very interesting issue this throws up is the way debt is packaged and sold and the way that foreign money or private equity is being used to set up companies to buy this debt its called Zero rated Assets and is written off against tax by institutions this is sold to DCAs for about 10p in the pound , they then are only interested in getting this secured and into litigation as quickly as they can.

I have investigated Marlin and anyone who has seen my previous posts will have seen how 3 companies including Marlin Financial Services ,Mortimer Clarke Solicitors and Marlin Legal Services all work from a very tiny property that looks like a private house in the middle of the Sussex countryside, their European operations operate from a virtual office in London, the business partners include a Solicitor so that’s how they have managed to set up the pseudo Solicitors firm I know his name and have called and asked to speak to him , for some reason he’s never in the office.

Have a look at this link because it explains their business model.

http://www.marlinlegalservices.co.uk/our_services.html

The good news is these people seem to pull away from legal actions that involves a defence at the local court stage, because I think their legal process is basically a computer program that seems to add on interest to the debt at a phenomenal rate that if it got to CC stage would raise an eyebrow or two.

I am in the process of writing to my MP as I personally think its immoral for UK based top world banking group to offload my accounts to venture capitalists who are openly working a business model of turning unsecured debt into secured

Thank you for the above rosa

Now if i understand it correctly Its the NOTICE of assignment and the date it is received thats needed most,

We have a purported DEED of assignment normally ok , but the deed we have has no particulars written on it about the said debt

On the last page it goes

Executed as a Deed by a partner in Ozannes,as a duly authorised attorney for GE capital bank ltd signed

 

Executed as a Deed by a partner in Ozannes as a duly authorised attorney

for CL finance ltd signed

BOTH signatures are the same

If ive got it right this is no proof

I have received a copy of the same as you from the muppetts GE/CLFinance/HC Cohen - which I requested under the CPR - However it is the first time that I have every seen it as I haven't received a DOA before so do they make them up as they go along..?

It has a date wrote on the front, no account number no outstanding debt figures or anything that would link the debt o/s and the company , only my name & this double signature

Do I understand that it is not worth the paper that it's written on...

B3rty

That sounds very familiar

I think so. mine was 4 pages

1st page date [ which is 2 days later than on claim form] between GE and CL

2nd Forms of Assigmment,heading.

3rd carries on from 2nd page

4th as printed above with 2 signaturs rhe same [who or what is OZANNES]

I think i will scan these up if i can

Is that the same as yours Ginnever

I am dealing with same GE/CL/COHERNS

I think so. mine was 4 pages

1st page date [ which is 2 days later than on claim form] between GE and CL

2nd Forms of Assigmment,heading.

3rd carries on from 2nd page

4th as printed above with 2 signaturs rhe same [who or what is OZANNES]

I think i will scan these up if i can

Is that the same as yours Ginnever

Yes, popeye1 - that is the same form, This is the first time that I have seen a deed of assignment, I have never received one before.

No i havent but then ive just started ,

Iwill try and scan them tomo

I am preety sure they are not right and that we shold be getting the NOTICE of ASS and not the DEED