Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

End Legalised Loan Sharks.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2699 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 757
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Very important vote on Monday,help make it happen.Latest news

Thursday night, MPs were going to vote on an amendment to the Finance Bill, which will limit how much short-term lenders can charge. However, they got into a fierce argument about other aspects of the bill which kept them in the House of Commons until 2am. Even tea and toast couldn’t keep them awake and the vote has been postponed until Monday.

Now we’ve got 2 more days to send our MPs a flood of emails telling them to put a stop to legal loan sharking, which the government has already admitted is a problem. Your MP might not turn up to vote, or not vote the right way. We can persuade our MPs that this is something we care about and doing nothing is not an option. Could you get in touch with your MP and tell them to stop opportunistic lenders ruining people’s lives? Get started here.

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last few hours. Email now.Links below.You could make a difference to be proud of..Kick off about 4-30pm

 

skkw_debtpicture.jpg Nearly half of all households are now struggling to make ends meet, and 10% of these say its because of the repayments they have to make on high cost credit products like payday loans, doorstep credit or hire purchase agreements. TODAY parliament has the opportunity to vote for action to be taken now to regulate this market- as it is in most other countries- and cap the costs of credit.

 

Yet whilst there is support for this measure across parliament, there could be a delay in action on this issue purely for party political purposes. Without pressure from campaigners, there is a fear that in order to create headlines at Liberal Democrat conference in the autumn Government MPs will vote against taking action now. You can read an article giving the background to this here and the views of grassroots Liberal Democrat activists who are angry that vulnerable consumers could take second place to choreographing coalition dividing lines. Every month more and more people are getting into debt with these firms, making any such delay potentially costly for thousands of families already experiencing financial hardship.

The debate and vote on New Clause 11 to the Finance Bill will be on Monday 4 July (having been delayed from Tuesday 28 June) and will start around 4.30pm. Its therefore not too late to ask your local MP to do the right thing and vote yes to encourage the Government to come clean and say what they intend to do now. The people struggling to repay these loans now deserve nothing less.

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

The yes's 228 vs no's 273- when they publish plans on this later in year make sure you ask govt mp's why they left people hanging so long!.Stella Creasy comment shortly after losing vote.A few other comments.

Debate about to close govt voting no but hinting at deal that has been done. So if you are a borrower wait til lib Dem conf for respite!

 

Thank you for your efforts. As someone who has got into trouble through Payday Loans, I appreciate it. Please dont give up

Also a comment from a CAB worker saying how sad.And many more to folow as the news comes in.

 

And if this article is right maybe theres hope yet . But why delay.http://www.labourlist.org/eaten-by-the-sharks

 

Surely not. http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/parliament/2011/07/nick-clegg---youre-so-vain-you.html

Its not over yet.Tawnyowl

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bit of news.

http://www.cfa-uk.co.uk/news.asp

 

 

Consumer Finance Association code of practice for payday lenders utter rubbish. more 'non action' . on legal loan sharks.

 

 

 

Hilarious - cfa admits only 8 members of group and they don't actually have an enforcement process worked out for it... Stella Creasy comment

Both consumer focus & cab don't want anything to do with payday lender voluntary code of practice as BOTH THINK think useless .

Payday lenders have failed to clean up their act:

Government must now intervene

http://www.responsible-credit.org.uk/uimages/File/cfrc%20payday%20code%20statement.pdf

 

Cfa claiming if you regulate uk Market there will be overseas lending to uk consumers like online gambling ....more novel excuses!

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely all a credit cap is going to do is shift the high risk customers to actual loan sharks at much higher rates of interest?

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will play intyo the hands of the banks who can charge whatever they want on overdrafts, because they dont have to quote an APR.

 

By trying to stop one high cost lender people will be pushed back into the arms of another who charges even more (and is responable for many of the problems we all now face).

 

Payday loans should not be used to top up peoples income and anyone with more than one payday loan needs their to take a look at their finances and stop before it all becomes to much. more regulation is desperatley needed in a sector that does whatever it feels like but for the people who use them correctly they are an alternative to even more expensive bank charges (or worse)

Link to post
Share on other sites

skkw_wfw_33.jpg

End Legal Loan Sharking Campaign Wins Government U Turn !

Lobby Your MP to Demand Independent Research

 

skkw_debtpicture.jpg Hello!

This week our campaign to end legal loan sharking won a significant victory- the Government has announced it is to go back to the drawing board and commission new research as part of its Consumer Credit Review. This is great news as it means they are now reversing their earlier opposition and taking seriously the calls for caps on the total cost of credit which could make a real difference in protecting British consumers who use high cost credit products.You can read the ministerial statement on this here.

I'm asking for your help now to make sure that this research is impartial and independent - In the past there have been real problems with the way research has been done in this area, and we have to make sure these problems don’t re-occur.

Please write to your MP asking them to lobby the Minister responsible Ed Davey to ensure that we can all be confident in the outcomes of the research this department commissions. Below is some suggested text to send to your MP and click here for a shortcut to contact your MP.

 

It’s vital that this research is done fairly, you can help make sure this happens.

 

 

skkw_stellasignatureshort_3.jpg

 

 

Stella Creasy

Labour and Co-operative MP for Walthamstow

 

 

 

 

Suggested Text for your MP

 

Dear XXXX

 

I understand that the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is commissioning research looking into the effects of introducing a range of caps on the total cost of credit within the high-cost credit sector.

 

While I welcome this news as a positive first step towards introducing tighter regulation of high-cost credit, I want to be sure that this research will carried out by an independent body that has no previous connection to this area of policy. This is prompted by well-documented concerns about previous research on introducing interest rate caps in this market. The European Commission recently published an in-depth study which reviewed all such research, and concluded that UK research on this issue was based on “controversial” and “weak” evidence (“Study on Interest Rate Restrictions in the EU”, January 2011, pp269-270).

 

It is important that these weaknesses are not replicated in the forthcoming research on introducing caps on the total cost of credit. Please write to Ed Davey, the minister for consumer credit, asking him to ensure that the new research is impartial and independent from previous studies so that we can all have confidence in its outcomes.

 

Yours sincerely,

XXXX

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely all a credit cap is going to do is shift the high risk customers to actual loan sharks at much higher rates of interest?

Back in this thread there are a few links discussing this reasoning.I am sure everything will become clear soon.I hope so as i am getting a bit of a sweat on.

Won’t a cap push borrowers into the services of illegal loan sharks?

A cap must be set high enough to ensure lenders can operate at a level which is financially viable. We also need to ensure that alternative affordable sources of credit are readily available through the Post Office network, local credit unions, CDFIs, co-operatives and mutuals

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK but (and yes I appreciate that this is a common thought on these forums) arent you assuming that the relevant companies are therefore behaving in a way that is over and above economic viability? In fact, you are going one further and implying that there is some form of cartel (official or unofficial) setting interest rates higher than is economically viable for this type of loan. I would dispute that this is the case, and would state that if the interest rates are genuinely set at an "economically viable" level, then the change to the current situation will be zero. Ultimately, there is a lot of competition in that market, and it is an open market, which by definition will drive interest rates down to an economical viable level in any event.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...