I would be sending an IA to the sheriff in response to the one from the claimant yes

I was hoping andyorch might pop in an comment 1st mind.

I am subbed to thread but not sure exactly what you wish me to confirm DX ?

attachment to post 94

nolans musings that they don't need produce this and that

and that the sheriff is wrong.

dx

I will take a look and post my thoughts.

Andy

Nolans and Cabot cant state anything or question legal points of the CCA1974...its all process that can and only be carried and followed out by the OC JDW.

As an Assignee claimant they are only debt collectors/chasers....not the creditor in this process and therefore cannot correct anything done or not done before assignment of the debt.

If the Creditor (JDW) has failed to adhere to the CCA1974...section 78 or /and sections 87/88 of the legislation...then the assignee is not allowed to enforce or request any relief against the agreement.

Andy

great.

so i'l translate that into something we can send to the sheriff as an incidental application

Thanks andy, dx.

Thats some interesting info,

so it would seem that they couldnt issue a new default notice during litigation like they suggested?

and if either original party has not executed the agreement properly (by not signing) does that mean assignee is not allowed to enforce or request money under the agreement?

for a simple procedure there is a lot of complicated language!

dx do you think i should be sending my responses to this and the last ia to nolans as well as the court?

cheers.

just fluff out post 106 a bit

any thoughts/additions to this would be appreciated before i send it

D2 should the court make these orders - no.

What relevance in the respondent admitting or not they did sign an agreement is immaterial as it seems nolans/cabot have raised a speculative claim without holding a signed copy of an agreement or a default notice and are being evasive when asked by the sherrif to provide these.

Nolans and Cabot cant state anything or question legal points of the CCA1974 as its all a process that can and only be carried and followed out by the original creditor JD Williams

As an Assignee claimant they are only debt collectors, not the creditor in this process and therefore cannot correct anything done or not done before assignment of the debt.

If the Creditor (JDW) has failed to adhere to the CCA1974 section 78 or /and sections 87/88 of the legislation by providing default notice and a signed agreement then the assignee is not allowed to enforce or request any relief against the agreement.

Perhaps before any hearing date is set time could be given to nolans to provide the court with a signed agreement and default notice.

I was unaware that I had to send copies of my reply to the claimant as well as the court as it does not state this on the incidental aplication form.

However i have emailed them this response and my previous response as requested.

pop in later

ok cheers dx

not had a chance

sorry

will deal ASAP

dx

hi dx, if you get a chance to have a look that would be great but please dont worry if you cant, i can just send tomorrow as is.

should be clearer tonight

needs work imho

wait

sorry pers issues take pref

will revisit tomorrow

dx

Hi dx, of course they do and thank you.

ok on the case now

dx

coming within the hour

sri mrs has been very poorly

dx

The original creditor JD williams has registered a default upon my credit file [copy enclosed] dated 02/06/2017.

This proves that the original creditor did issue a default notice persuant to CCA section 87/88.

Within their condelence on form 6a section D1 the claimant states the said supplier assigned all rights to them on 07/06/2016.

the original creditor did not allow the required 14 days notice under the act before selling the debt to the claimant..

re: from the CCA 1974 Act:

For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e) to enforce any security.

this perhaps explains why the claimant has been unable to supply said default notice and has continued to introduce further smoke and mirrors [re their reference to rankine/macguffin] in their recent form XXXX.

[then take apart their further ref to the agreement/statements etc etc

piece by piece]

hi, dx thank you very much for this, i hope your mrs gets well soon.

I was wondering would this work even though its " Cabot Credit Management Group Limited" under the lenders name on my credit report?

what if they can explain why the dates dont add up,

then i have gave them evidence of the agreement which they might not of had!

just a thought and i am sure you will set me straight!

Once again dx its really appreciated.

they cant 'explain it away'

your other sentences you've used explains why .[andyorch points]

producing evidence from your credit file is not admittance of any agreement.

i'll pretty much guess this is why they don't mention the default on the claimform [they normally do on their spc forms with others we've seen here]

ok cheers dx i will get it sent off today

well p'haps if andy is around he might wish to comment

but otherwise get it running to the court and nolans yes.

any thoughts/additions to this would be appreciated before i send it

 

D2 should the court make these orders - no.

 

It is irrelevant whether the Respondent admits or not that they did sign an agreement and is immaterial. The claimant to this claim Cabot have submitted a speculative claim without holding a signed copy of an agreement or default notice and are being evasive when asked by the Sheriff to disclose said documents on which its claim relies upon.

Cabot or its Representatives are not in a position to state anything or question legal points of the CCA1974 as its all a process that could be carried and followed out by the original creditor JD Williams

As an Assignee claimant they are only debt collectors, not the creditor in this process and therefore cannot correct anything done or not done before assignment of the debt.

 

If the Creditor (JDW) has failed to adhere to the CCA1974 section 78 or /and sections 87/88 of the legislation by providing a default notice and a signed agreement then the assignee is not allowed to enforce or request any relief against the agreement.

 

Perhaps before any hearing date is set time could be given to nolans to provide the court with a signed agreement and default notice.

 

I was unaware that I had to send copies of my reply to the claimant as well as the court as it does not state this on the incidental aplication form.

However i have emailed them this response and my previous response as requested.

Just a few tweaks above