Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Cabot/Nolans scottish 1a Summary Claim - Merged HBOS debts **WON Decree absolvitor**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2532 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

Cabot only got the debt in 2014...so they really haven't got a clue of any details apart from an account number and amount...the rest is just clutching at straws.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Their attention to details is shambolic as well - presenting a late payment charge as an actual payment was amateur.

 

oh dear

proof of that mov in date would be rather damning for them and their made up docs..

 

Got everything together now - solicitors letter to me at the first address proving the date I moved into the 2nd one.

 

Should there be anything else I mention tomorrow?

 

Just want to make sure I cover everything.

 

I'm looking to mention.

 

*Incorrect address on t's & c's letter

*Cabot confirming they have nothing on the overdraft piece.

*Late payment from June 2012 presented as an actual payment

*Still no proof of how payments were made which was first asked for in November

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have it covered with the above Stoosh...main point is that they have failed to comply with your section 78 request.....its incomplete with false T&Cs..and therefore they remain in default and unable to enforce the agreement pursuent to the CCA1974.

 

But throw in the rest just in case the judge falls for the recon.

 

Oh and best of luck for tomorrow.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon All,

 

So Nolans didn't bother submitting their documents to the court as they told me they intended to & instructed the local agent to seek a continuation for any defence bar statute barred.

 

Judge was very fair although didn't give me the chance to put a few points across - he expressed concern that Nolans only started writing to me towards the end of last year & hadn't provided CCA or submitted the docs they informed the judge they were submitting.

 

So reconvening on May 16th - starting to get concerned about this dragging out & dragging out - may seek legal advise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Afternoon All,

 

Just a quick update – haven’t been home yet to see it for myself but another letter arrived from Nolans today, fairly aggressive tone demanding that I send copies of my bank statements from 2011-2012 to prove I never made the £40 payments to Bank of Scotland and how it would be ‘frowned upon’ (they use that phrase twice in the letter) if I didn’t.

 

I don’t have anything to hide in respect of the bank statements, and I don’t see how me producing them on the day actually hinders their case.

 

They’ve also suggested I’ve denied having ever entered a credit agreement and they have again tried to present that the letter upgrading the card is the ‘credit agreement’

 

On the plus side they have removed the overdraft piece from the action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

std practice from them.

 

that's what they do on 99% of claims

they totally avoid answering anything to do with the legitimacy of their claims under the Consumer credit act

failing to provide the signed agreement

failing to send the default notice

failing to send the Notice of assignment.

 

all which are fatal under the act to any court claim.

 

you don't have to prove you made no payments from your bank accounts.

its for them to prove their case

 

and those little comments are usual for them too, ‘frowned upon’

 

here one someone came to me with a few weeks ago.

 

same rubbish as yours ...

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

Thought as much, for all I don’t have the letter in front of me the tone sounds a bit desperate.

 

 

The sheriff opened things up massively at the last hearing as there hadn’t been any previous discussion be it in court or through their letters about due process being followed relating to the notification of default & their assignation.

Comes across as if they’re flapping.

 

There is nothing on the statements but given their track record & the fact they have at best misrepresented several pieces of documentation I don’t think it’ll be hard for a sheriff to accept why I haven’t sent them the docs before the incidental hearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to abide by anything the pursuers nor their dogs demand or say

Its all willy waving

 

Only what the sheriff asks or demands of you

They Nolan's have no legal powers to demand a defendant does anything

 

Like to see your letter....

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

  • 1 month later...

can we see the old letter they refer too [theirs]

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

ah could of done with seeing that earlier

its a begging letter too.

 

 

good work!!

 

 

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

Had a lot going on this month between this & been rather ill - so any other action I should take about this letter?

 

I actually checked my bank statements - nothing went in or out my account between November 2011 & February 2012 so there's literally nothing on the statements - theres a specific reason for it too

Link to post
Share on other sites

can I just confirm what you said on page 6+7 of the summary cause response

did you state it was statute barred?

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

ok good

 

their last letter referring to their previous 'without prejudice letter' [that you nor they can refer to in court]

is stating that they want you to prove the debt is not statute barred which is not your problem.

 

they are saying they have record of payment in 10/02/12

 

your position has not changed

letters are willy waving.

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

Decree absolved granted!!

 

They asked for a dismissal,

judge said it was an attempt to circumvent court process as this would let them raise action again in future...

 

Delighted ...thanks to all who responded and assisted me.

 

Decree absolvitor sorry*

Link to post
Share on other sites

great result

bloodied nose for nolans..well done.

 

 

more coming soon nolans very soon..

 

 

dx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Consumer Action Group needs help to cover its expenses.

You could help by making a money contribution to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/paypal.php?go=donate

or by downloading our toolbar and using it to search the web instead of your normal search engine:- http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/cag_plugin.php

Please help.

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

Got myself in a tizzy over nothing tbh.

 

They haven't represented themselves once,

failed to submit an IA reducing the amount after writing to me telling me they had

 

- they left the local agent high & dry

 

- the rest of the agents & courtroom absolutely destroyed them..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done guys...excellent result.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...