Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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

Cabot Claimform - old Welcome secured loan - now applied for SJ & Lift the stay ***Claim DIscontinued***


amac31
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1687 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 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 9 months later...

Thanks unclebulgaria67,

 

Ascent legal have applied to lift the stay and there is a hearing on the 24th of September.

 

In our original defence we requested that we be allowed to submit a new defence should they produce the documents relied upon for the case.

 

They produced the dubious documents several months later so how do we go about submitting a new defence based on the fact that the alleged documents are not in any way shape or form true representations of the originals and have been created/doctored to suit the needs of this case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received a letter from them this morning in response to a letter I sent them outlining our situation financially, physically and mentally.

 

They have said that "their client is keen to resolve the matter without further recourse to litigation" and can we fill out an income and expenditure form with proposals of payment for their consideration. If we can agree suitable repayment terms the client ( Cabot ) would look to vacating/cancelling the hearing.

 

The whole point of this is the fact that we cannot afford to live at the moment.

I have a long term progressive illness that means I cannot works again and my wife works for just above the minimum wage and sometimes can only work part time due to my hospital visits/stays and having to care for our children.

 

We as a family of 4 rely on her wage and tax credits to survive.

 

Is there any point in trying to negotiate with them when we can realistically not afford to offer anything towards their claim of over 11k or should we just take our chance with the judge at the hearing? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you scan up what they have sent to ONE multipage PDF

read upload

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

what are they litigating over?

its a secured loan ?

so they are going for a CCJ?

 

please also complete this:

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you want the letter sent today or everything prior? there is probably over 30 pages.

 

It was a secured loan that was later rewritten.

They issued proceedings in February 2017 but the case was stayed because they could not produce the paperwork.

 

They sent out the dubious paperwork in November last year

then we received the court papers a few weeks ago to say that they were applying to have the stay lifted on the grounds that our defence was no longer valid as they had produced the paperwork.

 

We would also like to know why they are going for a CCJ when the loan is secured but the problem lies with the legal charge.

The copy they sent us in the paperwork contains my wife's married name and so does the alleged credit agreement sent to us.

 

Both have her married name handwritten on them but both are signed by her in her maiden name because the loan was took out 2 years before we were married.

 

We have obtained the original legal charge from land registry and it is correctly in my wife's maiden name.

It looks like the documents sent have been altered/doctored to suit the needs of the case.

The legal charge has an account number crossed out and our account number written in.

 

Our defence is that these cannot be true copies of our agreement as she was not known by that name at the time and we have typed documents from the original loan ( before the rewrite ) in which her name is correct and typed in not hand written in both the loan agreement and the Legal charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

reading back the thread to 2014

you state you still had the original documents?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

get scanning what they have sent please.

one multipage PDF only

read upload.

 

and get that Q&A link done and post up the org defence you filed too.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

[if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us]

2 defendants, me and my wife ( not wife at the time of loan )

 

Name of the Claimant ? Cabot Financial Ltd

 

Date of issue – 08/02/2017

 

 

Particulars of Claim

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.By agreement(s) entered into by the claimant and the defendant. The defendant has failed to pay the sum of 11k+ .

 

2.The claimant has requested payment but the defendant has failed to pay the sum demanded.

 

3.The claimant claims the sum of 11k+ and interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from 7/02/2017 until judgement or sooner payment.

 

4.Costs.

 

5.The claim does not include issues under the Human Rights Act1998. The claimant has complied with sections III and IV of Practice Direction Pre Action Conduct of the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

What is the total value of the claim? 11k+

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) ? No

 

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? Secured Loan

 

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 ? In branch

 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ? No

 

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. Assigned/ Debt purchaser

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes but mine is dated 2 years before my wife's

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No

 

Why did you cease payments? We were in financial difficulty and we lodged a complaint about being harassed for arrears at work etc.

 

What was the date of your last payment? July 2012

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? yes but no DMP.

 

Scanning now

 

Do I send docs by pm or do I need to delete all personal details?

If I do this then you will not see the basis of my defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

read UPLOAD carefully

 

yes we need to see your defence suitably redacted of pers info mind.

 

that POC is woefully bare

notice it says agreement

did they list any numbers 1 or 2.

 

as this is a re-write, then both must ne provided.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cabot Claimform - old Welcome secured loan - now applied for SJ & Lift the stay

I have wrote them exactly as they are on the original form, there is no mention of numbers 1 or 2.

I have scanned all documents I just need to remove information after the school run. The documents are scanned as best 

I can, the original quality of what I have been sent is not great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

then read upload carefully

and use the PDF reducer websites as recommended

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

using a a4 scanner @150dpi or using a phone/picture of each page?

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need for 600 dpi

read the upload guide

thats why we say @150dpi

else your files will be huge .jpg files

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

then i'm wondering if it was correct then....

 

use address A or B

or person A or b then.

but don't ID yourself no.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...