Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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
  • 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 2212 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

Hi guys

im hoping for some advice on what to do with this debt,

 

i had no idea they would take me to court for it and am panicking a bit now,

i have looked around the site but cant really find specific advice,

so apologies if i havent looked hard enough and i appreciate any help you can give,

cheers neil.

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down.

 

on 31/03/2015 the respondant entered a mail order agreement with J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED under which the respondant borrowed from them a sum of money payable on demand.

the said agreement was an agreement regulated under the consumer credit act 1974.

the respondant failed to pay as agreed on demand and is in breach of contract with the said J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED.

the said supplier assigned all rights in the said debt to CABOT FINANCIAL UK LIMITED ON 07/06/2016 and the claimants have advised the respondant of the same

the last payment was made to account on 07/09/2015

the said sum of £1029 is the sum sued for.

the claimants have made frequent requests to the respondant to make payments of the said sum but the respondant has refused or delayed to do so.

 

What type of action? (Small/Summary/Ordinary) simple procedure notice of claim. small?

 

Is the claim for a current or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? catalogue

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? after

 

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. debt purchaser cabot/nolans soliciters

 

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? most likely

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? unsure

 

Why did you cease payments:- financial difficulty

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? no

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? no

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

sit tight for now

don't do anything like send letters or ans phone or ring anyone

 

i'll be around later.

 

whats your return date

and hearing date please

 

read the first few threads here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?71-Scotland

 

to get an idea

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

firstly can I check the form was served person to person by a sheriff's officer?

 

and you have a copy of the attached reponse form

 

as this is the first time we've dealt with The simple procedure notice of claim

it would be helpful

if you can scan up TO ONE MULTIPAGE PDF

the claimform in total but redact it please

 

follow the 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

i'll review what we need to do over the next few days

as this is a new method for scotland

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

is this buy now pay late items....

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

It was buy now and it got added to the next months statement where I think 1 12th of the balance was the minimum payment,

 

it wasn't buy now pay 6 months later or anything like that.

 

I think some charges must of been added to the final figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Who Is The Claimant: cabot financial uk limited

 

Who Are the Solicitors: simon nolan/nolans solicitors

 

What type of action? (simple/Ordinary): simple

 

What is the claim for –

[type out ALL the text [minus pers details] from box D1

which FOLLOWS the words: [substantial connection with Scotland]

 

on 31/03/2015 the respondant entered a mail order agreement with J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED under which the respondant borrowed from them a sum of money payable on demand.

 

the said agreement was an agreement regulated under the consumer credit act 1974.

the respondent failed to pay as agreed on demand and is in breach of contract with the said J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED.

 

the said supplier assigned all rights in the said debt to CABOT FINANCIAL UK LIMITED ON 07/06/2016 and the claimants have advised the respondent of the same

 

the last payment was made to account on 07/09/2015

 

the said sum of £1029 is the sum sued for.

 

the claimants have made frequent requests to the respondent to make payments of the said sum but the respondent has refused or delayed to do so.

 

NOTE THE EXACT WORDING IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO YOUR CASE SO GET IT RIGHT.

 

Last Date Of Service:-19/04/17

 

Last Date For Response:- 10/05/17

 

What Documents are listed in Box E2: 1. Agreement dated 31/03/2015

 

Is the claim for a Overdraft, credit card, loan account, HP Agreement, Catalogue or mobile phone debt ? catalouge debt

 

from your knowledge: answer the following:

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007?after

 

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. debt purchaser

 

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

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? most likely

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? unsure

 

When was you last payment:-07/09/2015 (according to claim form)

 

Why did you cease payments:- financial difficulty

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? no

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management planicon?no

 

thanks again :)

Edited by Gerald1990
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 on it Gerald

 

typically in the old scheme [1a claims that are here already] no we don't or I don't anyway

you put them to strict proof in the response form.

 

this chess match might be different but we've until the 10th may yet.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

this week I've been involved in 2 1a small claims cases whereby the sheriff concerned was not really that interested in what paperwork the claimant had provided

they'd sent the signed agreement page and all the statements in one credit card case.

the sheriff asked was that the respondents signature on the agreement

and as there were numerous payments made

thought that outweighed the fact that the pursuer had not supplied a default notice nor a notice of assignment.

[this is covered Under Scottish Law equivalent of property act - The Transmission of Moveable Property Act 1862]

 

 

another was a cat debt, but basically the same hung on pages of payments whereby therewas no DN nor NOA provided.

 

 

its worthy to note

these were 1a claims not SPR and they were both in little far north courts not city courts like your one

 

 

so...

 

 

i'd recommend getting a CCA request running to the claimant

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

we will yes amongst other things

one being they shouldnt state they hold documents when they cant produce them...

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

hi :)

 

Im thinking ill probably have to get it sent of tomorrow to make sure it arrives at court for the 10th,

it says i have to send the response form to the court and a copy to the pursuer yet they only provide one copy of the response form!

 

 

do you think i would be ok sending the court one 1st class recorded and the one to cabot as regular mail with proof of postage?

 

I have just checked the tracking number for the letter i sent on the 30th of april and it says

"good news your item is progressing through our network Proof of delivery

This has not come through yet.

 

 

Please check later." so i am unsure if they have actually receievd the cca request :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

good doesn't matter they've not received it.

you don't actually want them to respond if yo think about it

 

 

are you not local to the court then to take it in personally?

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

ok i'll knock something up too later today.

 

 

its worthy to note that what they are putting in the SPc [red bit] is the same as they used on the old 1a claimforms

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

not had much time sorry

mrs is very poorly

 

thoughts attached

 

on 31/03/2015 the respondant entered a mail order agreement with J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED under which the respondant borrowed from them a sum of money payable on demand.

 

the said agreement was an agreement regulated under the consumer creditlink3.gif act 1974.

the respondent failed to pay as agreed on demand and is in breach of contract with the said J D WILLIAMS AND COMPANY LIMITED.

 

the said supplier assigned all rights in the said debt to CABOT FINANCIAL UK LIMITED ON 07/06/2016 and the claimants have advised the respondent of the same

 

the last payment was made to account on 07/09/2015

 

the said sum of £1029 is the sum sued for.

 

the claimants have made frequent requests to the respondent to make payments of the said sum but the respondent has refused or delayed to do so.

 

d1

 

As a respondent i specifically make reference to the Simple Procedure Rules 2016 in so far as my understanding is that:

 

1.4(2)

The Sheriff must ensure that parties who are not represented, or parties who do not have legal representation, are not unfairly disadvantaged...

 

... i represent myself and are totally at a loss upon how to respond to such a claim & welcome any assistance the sheriff can give me

 

1.6(9)

When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must not take advntage of the party.

 

1.6(10)

When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must help the court to allow that person to argue a case fairly.

 

..i expect the claimants' representative to employ the above.

..........

 

The Claimant is a well known Debt Buyer or Debt Collection Agency that purchases large debt portfolio 'En-Masse' for a discounted Pence to Pound reduced value.

 

These debt portfolios, be them direct from the Original Creditors or exchanged under sales between like Debt Buying Organisations, were placed for sale because the Original Creditor neither wished to prosecute their customer themselves due to bad publicity or are typically related to issues of enforceability under the Consumer Credit Act.

 

 

I have had financial dealings with [original Creditor] 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 request for further information.

 

The Respondent puts the Claimant to strict proof provide under the Consumer Credit Act the required documents to legally be able to enforce and bring this claim to court namely:

 

The Signed Consumer Credit Agreement

The Notice Of Assignment under ...

The Default Notice Issued By The Original Creditor Under Section...

 

A detailed statement of the account and how, with specific reference toward additional interest added because of late/no payment, and any additional penalty fees or interest added, have resulted in the balance now claimed.

 

d2.

. The claimant has averred on their Claim Form that they hold the signed agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 dated 31/03/2015. A CCA request section 7? was sent recorded delivery on [date]. To date the claimant has failed to comply & is in default of said request.

 

2. The respondent is unaware of any default notice served under section .. of the consumer credit act

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...