Thread: 1st credit and stat demand HELP **WON**

What I find astounding is that the CCCS have said 'don't do anything'.....the fact 1st credit are doing this DESPITE regular payments beggars belief !!

You have done the right thing in the first place, by sending the CCA request off....

You need to totally dispute the debt, what have you put in your defence so far ?......

Have you read these posts here -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...edit-stat.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...connaught.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...st-credit.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...est-425-a.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...thin-week.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...rocess-sd.html

You've done a good job here Digi....I would spend some time reading around the forums too including the legal successes and have a look at the case law in here - this is a BR defence but you'll get the idea from this....

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CREDIT AGREEMENT

Under section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act A formal written request for any true copies of signed consumer credit agreements was sent to XXXX. via guaranteed delivery on the (insert the date on the recorded delivery slip here ) (see attached document 1 – you need to copy the letter and the recorded delivery slip (take 2 copies one for the court and one for the opposing solicitor ) – to date they have not sent any copies of any Consumer Credit Agreements and they are in default of that request under section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act

I believe there are no properly executed signed Consumer Credit Agreements (as the account does not exist), If they had been able to supply these agreements then they would have done already to avoid committing an offence under section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act

SECTION 78 (1) CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of £1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and..

(c) the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

The Consumer Credit Act in section 78(6) States that

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

It must also be noted that the agreement must contain the prescribed terms.

Consumer Credit Act

8.2 What if prescribed terms are missing or incorrect?

s127(3) provides that the court may not make an enforcement order unless a document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor

If therefore any of the prescribed terms is missing, or incorrect, the agreement is not enforceable against the debtor, and the court is precluded from making an enforcement order.

(N.B - For the avoidance of doubt the 2006 Consumer Credit Act does not change the above legislation……

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 2 and Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007 (No. 123 (C. 6))
Citation
1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) Order 2007.
Interpretation
2. In this Order “the 2006 Act” means the Consumer Credit Act 2006.
Commencement
3. — (1) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 1 shall come into force on 31st January 2007.
(2) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 2 shall come into force on 6th April 2007.
Transitional Provisions
4. Subject to article 5, section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have no effect for the purposes of the 1974 Act, in relation to agreements made before 6th April 2007. (cont)
5. Section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have effect for the purposes of the definitions of “debtor” and “hirer” in section 189(1) of the 1974 Act wherever those expressions are used in—
a)
sections 77A, 78(4A), 86A, 86B, 86C, 86D, 86E, 86F, 129(1)(ba) 129A, 130A and 187A of the 1974 Act;
(b)
section 143(b) of the 1974 Act in respect of an application under section 129(1)(ba) of that Act; and
(c)
section 185(2) to (2C) of the 1974 Act insofar as it relates to a dispensing notice from a debtor authorising a creditor not to comply in the debtor's case with section 77A of that Act,
in relation to agreements made before 6 April 2007)



REFERENCE TO CASE LAW

• As the creditor has not provided the credit agreement Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40 states that:
  ‘….the effect of the failure to comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 was that the entire agreement ………….. was unenforceable. The statutory bar on its enforcement extended to First County Trusts's right to recover the total sum payable on redemption, which included the principal as well as interest.’

SUMMARY OF WILSON v FIRST COUNTY TRUST LTD (2003) UKHL 40

THE WILSON CASE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENT OF NO ACCEPTABLE CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENT THEN THE CREDITOR COULD NOT RECOVER MONIES OWED UNDER ORDINARY CONTRACT LAW REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY COULD PROVE THE DEBT EXISTED OR NOT – THIS WAS THE DECISION OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE BINDING IN THIS COURT

The law states that without a prescribed agreement the courts may not enforce under 127(3) and

1.In the case of Dimond v Lovell [2000] UKHL 27, Lord Hoffmann said , at page 1131:-

“Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay.”

2.Sir Andrew Morritt, Vice Chancellor in Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 633 said at para 26 that in the case of an unenforceable agreement:-

“The creditor must…be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan monies to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the monies in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid;”

I refer to LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD in the House of Lords Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) paragraph 29
” The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order.”

If the agreements are non existent, then the respondent was in error when it stated that a liquidated and legally enforceable sum was due to the respondent at the time the bankruptcy petition was issued.

DEFAULT NOTICE


The Need for a Default notice

• Notwithstanding the above, it is also drawn to the courts attention that no default notice required by s87 (1) Consumer Credit act 1974 has been attached to the petition.

• It is denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant

• Notwithstanding the above points, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

• Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87,88 and 89 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement. therefore without a valid default notice, I suggest the claimants case falls flat and cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974

• Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim, /at all. It is averred that the Claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment in accordance with section 136(1), of the Law of Property Act 1925, in respect of the alleged debt. The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, which is likely to include penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].
The defendant requires sight of the notice of assignment of the debt. In addition the defendant requires proof of service of the Notice of Assignment in accordance with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 which is required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action in their own name since it appears this is an assigned debt. the reason the defendant requests this information is inter alia to clarify the dates are correctly stated on all documents , the defendant notes that if there are errors in the assignment it may be rendered in effectual in law per W F Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke and another - [1956] 2 All ER 169

Perfection of the assignment.

2.1. I have never received a notice of assignment according in all respects with s136 of the Law of Property Act 1925

2.2 I respectfully submit to the court that steps to ensure service of a notice of assignment are only adequate if the requirements of s196 of the law of property act 1925 are complied with regard to either (a) personal service or (b) postal service.

The requirements for service via the post are

Law Of Property Act (1925) s196
.
Regulations respecting notices.

1 Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

2 - It is noted that the claimant has, at no time, provided evidence that the notice of assignment was sent via registered post, and if “sent” via any other method, the notice was not sufficiently served

3 -. I did not receive any notice of assignment in the format prescribed by law and served in the prescribed manner from the respondent, and I have asked the other members of my family if they signed for such a document; they have assured me that they did not.

4 - To the best of my knowledge, any notice of assignment sent by registered post must, therefore have been returned to the respondent.

5 - Consequently, I do not believe that any notice of assignment was properly served upon me at the date of the bankruptcy petition, and therefore any assignment has not been perfected in law.

It appears to me that 1st Cretins just have a rolling programme and after they have held the account for x months a stat demands is sent whether you are making payments or not. My set aside date is next week, will ring the court the day before to make sure 1st Cretins haven't pulled out.

This is my 600th post! Do i get a star?

Hope you get it all sorted out - good luck

Digi, thanks for the star If you read my thread you'll see i've updated it to say I receive the "we will not be attending the court and are prepared to withdraw the stat demand" letter from 1st Cretins today, i'm pretty sure you'll receive an identical one shortly! I certainly hope that you do. I'll be contacting the court next week just to make sure they have received the same letter.

Good luck

I think, if the SD is set aside then, you can ask for costs, 42man will confirm this

As per costs....fax them 24 hours before the day of your hearing OR post them recorded delivery so they arrive 24 hours before....

remember to title them LITIGANT IN PERSON COSTS...

Surfaceagentx20 also very kindly posted up a link to a form that you could use here....but again edit it to read LITIGANT IN PERSON COSTS....I believe mileage you can claim back at 40p per mile...

This is the link - Form N260 - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ml#post1765170

I agree SP.....shocking to be honest...

Hi 42man they have sent me what looks like an application form no prescribed terms no interest detaisl no payment terms nada i have attached it please advise what i need to do now. cheers

I have re-attached the images a zip file your advice or anyone else is greatly appreciated. Cheers