Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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 Dumfries SPR claim - old Jacamo JDW CAT Debt***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2191 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

no

i just said the bit about having financial dealings with them before,

 

i tried to take your advice and said very little.

 

the sheriff at one point said something along the lines of me accepting the debt

but disagree with it on technicalities and saying thats fine

 

i cant remember exactly what he said but at no point did i admit entering into the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

good

 

go get your credit file

is there a defaulted date in the debt summary

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

oh dear so they cant deny the default notice exists...

 

blow their silly comments about the dn is not required straight out the water as the oc obviously issued one before they sold it on.

 

what date did cabot buy the debt?

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

so the OC defaulted before sale as they should do.

cabot name replaced theirs on the Credit file

so cabot cant deny the existence of a default notice

and cant 'speculate' through their useless nolans about why it was registered

 

you can play this 2 way

plead ignorance about ever seeing your credit file till advised to view it, finding the default.

 

 

or go whole hog and explain the above andhow confused you are with nolans statement.

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

good

 

was this attachment yours

very good

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

that's the way to go.

 

right you cant deny knowledge as this was recorded delivery [when]

so ring the clerk and check if you can file by email [ask for the email to use]

and we'll get something ready tonight

to file

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

this will be a late one as i'm tied up till well past midnight

but the basics are already here

just pull apart that document they've produced to try and gain a default degree.

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

working.......

 

need the date of the 1st sheriffs written order please

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

response:

 

using the original form 9g from the claimant:

 

enter your details in D1.

 

D2 tick NO box

 

D3.

enter 'see attached'

 

attachment

 

D3 incidental order

 

Cabot Financial {uk} Limited V [yourself]

 

Court Ref :

 

i contest the claimants' representative attached responses labelled C1 on the Form 9g dated 11/10/2017.

 

1.the Respondent has never admitted in court entering into said agreement.

 

At the last hearing i stated that:

I have had financial dealings with JD Williams in the past

I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my s77 CCA request for further information.

 

The claimant through their representative Nolans have now produced a generic agreement and a set of terms and conditions from the relevant time period.

These contain areas whereby my details are type written.

None contain my signature.

This does not meet the enforceability requirements of the consumer credit Act.

The claimant has failed to indicated their source.

The Internet holds many downloadable examples of such 'blank' documents.

 

2. In May 2017 of his 1st Order, the sheriff note 2. stated

'Section 87[1] of the consumer credit act 1974 provides that service of a default notice on the debtor in accordance with section 88 is necessary before the creditor or owner can be entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement -

[a] to terminate the agreement or

to demand earlier payment of any sum or

[c] 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.'

 

As with my response to the claimants smoke and mirrors over the agreement at the last hearing with regard to Rankine and McGuffick,

i have taken advise from the same source regarding the need for the issuance of a default notice before enforcement.

 

My credit reference file.. states a default notice WAS issued on 02/06/2016 now under Cabots name.

This is from before the date of assignation to cabot detailed in their own disclosures.

 

Default notices and litigation under the Consumer Credit Act July 2010 states:

For a creditor to enforce a credit agreement against the debtor,

he must serve the latter with a default notice,

this notice must be served in accordance with section 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

 

The Claimants' representative appears to be introducing more smoke and mirrors to confuse the need and production of said default notice before any enforcement can begin, preferring to relying more upon a list of transactional history to prove it's point.

 

If the Claimant did receive the agreement from JD Williams, why have they still failed to produce a copy of the default notice.

 

In summary:

 

The claimant has failed in most parts to satisfy both the sheriffs' 1st order of May 2017 and his 2nd order of july 2017 and the respondent requests the sheriff exercise his right under rule 1.8[11] and dismiss the case.

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

updated the above.

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

Just one slight amendment ....

 

Default notices and litigation under the Consumer Credit Act July 2010 states:

 

Should be pursuant to CCA1974

 

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

:whoo:

thanks andy

not too bad for 4am then....

 

this notice must be served in accordance with section 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

 

replaced with

 

Should be pursuant to CCA1974

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

  • 4 weeks later...

well they are still trying to put up a fight!

 

i have got a week or so to reply to a new incidental orders application,

again i would be really grateful for any help with this.

no hurry this time!

 

page 1 and 2 reply to the first incidental application by the sheriff saying that he will postpone and provide notes.

 

pages 3 through 12 are the fifth written orders

- the sheriff just running through what happened at court back in September and his opinion on what happens next

he says nolans should request a hearing if they want one.

 

pages 13 through 16 a new incidental application form,

nolans requesting a hearing but not before receiving the documents i have sent to court

(my reply to the last incidental application which never said i had to send them a copy)

 

cheers :)

docs1 .pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm they always hark on about the respondant must tell the judge if he did or didn't sign an agreement.

they've done that in 3 that I've been involved with now.

each time they lost hand down.

 

the fact that they cant produce the signed agreement. but only a mere 'lookalike' , sort of answers that question for themselves.!!

 

what relevance the respondent admitting or not they did sign an agreement is immaterial.

so if the respondent says yes...then its ok that they cant produce it ...haha sheriff look the prat just admitted he did sign an agreement...are we being stupid here nolans or are you?

 

don't raise a speculative claim cabot/nolans clearly stating on it that you HOLD the signed agreement when in all truth you DONT!!

 

so who's really lying to the sheriff???

 

more soon

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

you keep removing dates on docs within scans

you don't need too

what date is on nolans IA please

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

p'haps andyorch will pop in and read the last few pages of that upload [its now hidden]

and comment on the claimants lastest wrigglings that they don't need to produce a default notice...

 

but eitherway you need to file a costs order as well as anything andy points out you need to say if anything

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

also don't forget post 33 in your thread going fwd too

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...