Thread: Penfold V Equidebt/ Woolwich

Hi,

Just looking for some advice please.

I had a very old debt (like 10 odd years old) that was being serviced by Equidebt Limited. Cut a long story short that was settled in the end last year.

I would like to now find out if they were legally allowed to service that debt via the CAA route. I sent Equidebt a letter on 5th March and got a reply today! Wow quick and it said:

“With reference to your recent letter, the contents of which have been duly noted.

After giving consideration to this matter, we confirm that we have returned the file back to Woolwich Plc. and marked our records as closed. Please send all future correspondence to them direct.

Yours sincerely,”

Now a couple of things here, does that mean that they were only collecting for Woolwich and all monthly payments were being sent to Woolwich? Also should I merely send another CCA request letter to Woolwich?

Thanks,

Penfold

Similar Threads:

• You must call Equidebt
• CCA by Coop/Equidebt/Heatons - refusal to accept payments
• Equidebt - Please help
• Penfold V Equidebt (Woolwich Debt)
• The Woolwich, Equidebt & Heatons LLP Saga...

Hi,

Further to several months of letters to and fro I decided to take Woolwich to court and issued on 20th July and they had till yesterday to defend. They did not send a defence in!

What do I do now? This is not bank charges, but claiming monies back for an old debt they they cannot prove. See POC below:

1. The Claimant had an account (“the Account”) with the Defendant which was joint with his ex-wife. This was opened on or around 1997 and subsequently sent to a debt recovery firm (“Equidebt Limited”) in 1998
2. A schedule of payments made to Equidebt Limited is attached to these particulars of claim
3. The Claimant made a formal request for a copy of the signed, executed credit agreement for the above account under Section 77(1) and Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to the debt recovery company and the Defendant
4. The Claimant contends that the debt amount was inaccurate and would therefore like proof of how the debt was originally came about as the Claimant was not the main account holder.
5. The Defendants obligation to supply these documents has been breached under Section 189 of the CCA 1974 and therefore the debt is unenforceable and cannot now be proved or enforced in a court of Law
6. The Defendant contends that the data was destroyed under the Data Protection Act, however, the Information Commissioners Office only issues Data Protection guidelines and as any learned person would know “standard industry practice” does not correlate with “legal right or responsibility”. The Claimant therefore requests a full refund of payments made under this non enforceable debt, interest and court fees going back to its inception.
7. The Claimant argues that this account was active by virtue of regular payments being made into it on a monthly basis.
8. In accordance with the Act section 142(1)(b) the Claimant requests that the court declares the credit agreement unenforceable under section 65(1) by virtue of section 127(3).
9. By virtue of the unenforceability of the credit agreement as item 10 above, the Defendant has no rights, as precedent set in Wilson and others v Secretary of State for Trade and industry (Appellant) [2003] UKHL 40.
10. Therefore the Claimant claims all monies received by the Defendant or Equidebt Limited to the Account.
11. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant.
12. Accordingly the Claimant Claims:

a) the return of the amounts paid to Equifax Limited in the sum of £1038;
b) Court Costs;
c) The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 28/05/1998 to 06/07/2007 of £478.37 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.23
I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.


Please help what do I do now and how???

Thanks,

Penfold

Hi and thanks for the reply, but I filled this at my local court and they confirmed no defence filled. They also said put judgement in straight away. So I did that yesterday and await the outcome. If this result goes my way can I use it in my particulars of claim on another debt that has no agreement?

Thanks,

Penfold

Thanks Welshcakes,

That's pretty much what I thought too. Next defendant is Natwest so completely different. No agreement and bless them they sent me statements with my name completely wrong so not even me! But I have been paying! Oh they are in trouble... I wonder if they will defend? I still cannot believe Woolwich did not defend or try to at least...

Penfold

Ok now I am worried....

I decided that since Judgement was supposed to be due today by default (Woolwich not defending) I thought well I can speak to Barclays Litigation and get things moving. Problem is that now they are aware of the case and will be dealing with it. I do not know if it slipped under the door without them realising and I have now messed it up by informing them of my case!

So silly I cannot believe I was trying to be clever and have probably stuffed myself...If they decided to defend late will the Judge take into account I informed them of the case etc?

Any views appreciated guys,

Penfold

It appears to be a mess up by the Courts! Barclays Litigation filed an acknowledgement of service and intention to defend. So I should not have been allowed to try to get judgement. Does that go against me in the eyes of the Judge or merely an error that they will see? Also the court sent me the letter regarding the acknowledgement with no stamp so it took longer and I had to pay for it too!!!

My conversations with Barclays Litigation were fruitful in a way because I now have the name and email of the guy who will be dealing with my case so perhalps not a bad thing in the end... Will keep all updated,

Penfold