Helllppp - Honours Student Loans

[caro]

Is it possible you may have made some cash payments or some other method that wouldn't have gone through your bank?

[xray2]

Hi,

We have 3 letters from IJ all stating the Creditor as SLC, however HSL are trying to say the following they purchased the loans but the SLC continued to administer them until 2004 see below:




So if they are claiming that SLC acted on their behalf then IJ were acting for them only we did not know that, that doesn't sound very fair!

A in post #10 is a letter I sent to the Judge recently, we were informed that to consider dismissal a N244 needed to be filed. However, on the same day that letter arrived a letter from HSL arrived with 'some' of the requested documentation.

The defence submitted was basically that we had never heard of this company until recently and that they had failed to prove they bought the loans followed by second part of post #13.

I find it a little scary that a company can claim you owe them money with no proof they have purchased your loan. Surely the Courts do not expect people just to pay up without evidence and if we are expected to provide proof of postage then surely the claimant does too therefore our request for c. True copies of any notice of assignment and/or default notice or enforcement notice that you or the original creditor sent me, with a copy of any proof of postage that you hold is more than reasonable? They have failed to do this but have sent a letter that shows they bought £1m of loans from the SLC but that does not prove ours were included.


Thanks again

[xray2]

Definately not cash payments my husband did have a credit card for a while but we think not at that time period but cannot be sure. I have asked them to tell us what method etc surely if they do know then they are just obstructing and ensuring this goes to Court?

Thanks for everything soooo appreciated

[xray2]

Caro I have sent Steve something and am hoping you two can share

Thanks I am so very grateful and hoping I will actually get a full nights sleep soon and it will be all thanks to you two

[xray2]

Hi
We have a court case tomorrow the Notice of Allocation states "Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any experts' report) on which he intends to rely no later than 14 days before the hearing."
About 10 minutes ago my postman turned up with an A4 file of paperwork the claimants solicitor says they have filed in court in readiness of the forthcoming hearing. There letter is dated the 5th and the postmark is 8th we have recieved evidence the day before, surely they cannot be allowed to depend on this?

Interestingly I have had a quick read and all their evidence is this is an example letter of ... but none of it directly relates to our account ie no account numberrs on letters etc.
The loan agreements they have are NOT signed by both parties does this matter? Further there is no notice of assignment that shows they purchased my loans at any time all they have is an example letter, no account numbers or details.

Do you think they have just submitted this very late evidence to scare us away tomorrow?

Thanks

[xray2]

BTW we submitted a N244 which is being heard immediately prior so does this change the evidence submission dates?
They have also subimtted an N244 to amend the POC's which they had got wrong.

[Lula]

they shoould have submitted evidence to you and the court 14 days prior. Have you got your bundle ready just in case, or are you still awaiting paperwork which the other party have yet to disclose?

[xray2]

hi,

we submitted evidence attached to our N244. We have asked for legible copies of the agreements, notice of assignment and copies of default notice they say was made this year. We have asked for strict proof.

They keep banging on about providing us with info under the CCA but we asked for it under the CPR. They have admitted copies of agreements are not signed by both parties but argue this does not matter because copies are not evidence and we have not been prejudiced by the fact that they are not signed by the other party and that they can omit from copy documents the signature under consumer credit regs 1983.
They have also admitted that copies are not legible in places but are legible in all material effects.

Further in letters they claim a default notice was sent on xxx/08 but we have one from almost 6 years prior obviously they cannot issue two so are now only claiming one.

The default notice also includes penalty charges so would this not mean it is unlawful?

Thanks

[42man]

If they have not provided anything under the CPR18, then request the judge to dismiss it.....

If they have admitted there are no copies, then the debt is unenforceable....you need to completely dispute the total debt !! statements aren't enough either as they can easily be falsified...I know of one cagger who put the opposition solicitors name and address using photoshop on some bank statements (not to defraud but simply to demonstrate that anybody can do it)....

Without a copy of the agreement with the prescribed terms they are stuffed...

[xray2]

Thanks They do have a copy it just isnt very legible. What they do not have a copy of is a notice of assignment though they provide an example of what one would look like rofl!

[xray2]

Part18 does not apply to Small Claims track

[xray2]

They have also stated on their POC that they issued a default on xxxx and then in evidence admit to an earlier one within a 6 year time frame .. that means two default notices I know the CCA says a default notice can only be issued once but can't find the relevant part of the act grrrrr!

[xray2]

Do agreements covered by the CCA have to be signed by both parties to be enforceable and if so does anyone know the relevant section of the Act? We have been provided with copies but only one is signed by both parties.

Also notice of assignment there is not one I assume this comes under the CCA too anyone know the relevant section.

Thanks

[pt2537]

Originally Posted by xray2

Do agreements covered by the CCA have to be signed by both parties to be enforceable and if so does anyone know the relevant section of the Act? We have been provided with copies but only one is signed by both parties.

Also notice of assignment there is not one I assume this comes under the CCA too anyone know the relevant section.

Thanks

for an agreement to be enforceable, it must when placed before the court contain( Not embody) the prescribed terms per sched 6 col 2 SI1983/1553 and must be signed by the debtors or debtors if there are more than one

as long as the agreement conforms to this as a minimum that would be enforceable

with regards to the NOA, it is governed by the Law of Property Act 1925 and the law of Equity

i hope this helps

[xray2]

Thanks - I realised after I posted that I was after the Law of Property

As to the agreements they are pretty much illegible all 3 signed by the debtor but only one by the creditor. Had thought they had to be signed by both parties

Thanks again

[pt2537]

Originally Posted by xray2

Thanks - I realised after I posted that I was after the Law of Property

As to the agreements they are pretty much illegible all 3 signed by the debtor but only one by the creditor. Had thought they had to be signed by both parties

Thanks again

no probs, they may be also able to over come the illegibility issues by providing a typed copy if it goes to court

[xray2]

Hi
Its in court tomorrow . They are saying it is on microfiche does this constitute an original?

They have no notice of assignment or any real proof of purchase of the debt. They just refer to this is an example of what would have been sent!!

Also, they should have submitted evidence within 14 days of hearing to both parties but this only arrived today!

They have put in an N244 to amend their POC due to admin errors but have made admin errors on the N244!

argggghhhhhhhh

PS They have also claimed to have issued TWO default notices within a 6 year period - is this not unlawful too?