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.
      • 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

PRA Claimform - old MBNA stayed claim - is it SB'd now?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2549 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

sorry?

 

 

when was your last payment?

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 full story please

and no a claim cant be stayed by a CPR request.

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 i see

someone hi-jacked an old thread...

 

 

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

My question was intended as a general question without getting getting into the nitty gritty of my case.

 

 

The question quite rightly posed was focused simply on the previous post re statute of limitations without my diverting the thread with my own matter.

 

And yes Ccbc HAVE stayed the claim against me as I have tried to get the claim struck out due to non compliance with my 31.14 (something I learned on these forums ) .

 

 

My application was denied and the judges remark was "claimant to file in due course" when I have seen an identical situation to mine where the judge gave claimant ten (or so) days to file otherwise strike out.

 

 

I phoned ccbc to see if claimant has complied and they told me it is stayed.

We are now months later and nothing happening.

 

Hence trying to keep it simple hoping that if this drags on I can rely on statute of limitations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've made this its own thread.

 

 

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 I haven't changed my username . I rarely post but have gleaned extremely good info on these forums and successfully won 2 cc cases.

 

i also looking into Ppi reclaim as offset but don't know where to begin with Ppi as I just read an article here yesterday about payment breaks and not to use a Ppi reclaim company

Link to post
Share on other sites

post here now please

 

the SB clock stops when a claimform is issued.

 

who was 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

no PRA are debt puchasers so its now NOTHING to do with MBNA

they sold the debt.

 

 

what about your CCA request

that's the important one CPR is a request and does not have to be complied with.

 

 

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

As this is now my thread I can say the claimant sent me a miniature claim form that is barely readable,

 

 

then received a further letter stating they had not completed their response to my 31.14 and presumably that is what we are waiting for.

 

 

It's quite a large claim (just under £20k).

I don't want to give specifics as I am sure both sides read these forums.

 

My CCA was responded to with the miniature agreement , the account, The assignment which I have never seen and also the default notice I have never seen

Link to post
Share on other sites

no PRA are debt puchasers so its now NOTHING to do with MBNA

they sold the debt.

 

 

what about your CCA request

that's the important one CPR is a request and does not have to be complied with.

 

 

dx

 

I assume you put a defence in which is why the stay happened?

 

You need to get the claim discontinued for the limitations act to kick in. Pra are not to be trusted.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they haven't complied with the CCA

we already know the MBNA application forums are not compliant as they don't hold all the prescribed terms to make it enforceable

 

 

theres really no need to hide

there are hundreds of claim threads here already regarding PRA and the large portfolio of lemon MBNA debts they bought in 2015 here.

 

 

the claim is stayed so end of the matter really unless they pay to lift it.

 

 

scan up your CCA return to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF 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

Hi

My old MBNA account came back as just a signature box although it was from 2005- last sale was to arrow who I have not heard from for several years

 

I suspect you went after a strike out a little too quickly - there is a balance to be followed between giving them enough time and not letting it drag along too long.

I read of a case where someone applied for a strike out and ended up with a CCJ although no idea how that actually happened.

 

There are options which may cost you money depending on your income

 

leave it stayed

Apply for an unless order (costs money)

After an appropriate amount of time 'invite' PRA to discontinue the claim to save costs on the basis you will be applying for a strike out and costs

 

 

I will leave the decision to you and the advice to those much better than me

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think mine is from 2010, internet application, no signature.

Shall I scan up the CCA return (ie the redacted agreement) and my defence as well (redacted)?

 

Many thanks for the replies. I turned in last night.

I think mine is from 2010, internet application, no signature. But I am sure that I ticked the box for payment protection which theirs does not show.

 

 

Should I scan up both the CCA return AND the defence (both redacted of course)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes please to ONE multipage PDF

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

yes please to ONE multipage PDF

 

Just one final thing before i upload the agreement. I am going to upload EXACTLY as they sent me apart from redaction of my name- just to show the miniature appearance

BUT

I am also able to scan in zoomed so that it may be readable, but this may be detrimental to me. The reason why it might be good to do this is for others to see whether the correct terms are in it if the claimant tries to do the same - what do you think? Scan in zoomed as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claimants have been known to send enlarged copies when legibility has been mentioned so I really do not see any problem

 

It is however a sad state of affairs when debt purchasers trawl these forums so if you feel uncomfortable with it then don't do it.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post stop worrying

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...