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

Capquest/Shoos SPR claim Kirkcaldy - old Very CAT debt - SBd **CASE DISMISSED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2373 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 all,

 

I'm new to this site but I really need help.

 

a few years ago I got myself into a right pickle with debt.

 

I was young and stupid and when it came to having to pay, I couldn't.

 

I have had letters from collection 'enforcement officers' which I haven't given a second thought, letters have been binned etc and we've since moved house.

 

Yesterday morning two men knocked my door and handed me a form from the local sheriff court advising that I will be taken to court in order to recoup the money owed to the collection agency.

 

They did not introduce themselves (later found them to be capquest agents from a clause in the paperwork) and I did not acknowledge the debt or confirm who I was in relation to the person they were looking for.

 

What do I do?

Where do I stand with this?

 

The debt was bought by capquest in December 2012 from original creditor Very and I have had zero contact with either since defaulting on payment to Very in November 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no what you had at your door were sheriff officers,

nothing to do with capquest,

they came from your local sheriff court because a court claim by capquest has been made against you over an old shop direct Very Catalogue account you ran away from.

 

I also doubt you had any letters from enforcement officers most probably DCA'slinked to the capquest group.

 

firstly , you now have a court claim and you need to act swiftly and correctly

to assist us in helping you to do that

can you please complete the following link:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?475116-You-have-received-a-SCOTTISH-Court-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**updated-April-2017**

 

thanks

 

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

name the issuing court:Kirkcaldy Sheriff court

 

Who Is The Claimant: Capquest Investments Limited

 

Who Are the Solicitors: Shoosmiths LLP

 

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]

 

1.The claimants are a finance company which inter alia operates the business of debt purchasing.

2.By virtue of a debt purchase agreement ("the agreement") between the claimants and Shop Direct Limited ("the Original Owner") dated 21/12/2012, the claimant acquired title to and was assigned the right to payment in respect of all debts and other monetary claims of any nature due or owing by the respondent to the Original Owner which were in existence as at the date of the Agreement, and in particular in relation to the contract hereinafter condescended upon.

3.The said assignation was intimated to the respondent by way of a written notice on or around 21/12/2012.

4.The agreement between the respondent and the original owner upon which this action is based was regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

5.Further information in relation to that agreement is contained in section D4, where we set out the sums due and the basis upon which they fell due.

 

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

 

Last Date Of Service:- 25/09/2017

 

Last Date For Response:- 16/10/2017

 

What Documents are listed in Box E2:

A copy of the credit agreement, statements of account and notice of assignation will be produced in any defended process to follow hereon.

 

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

 

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? Not to my knowledge

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I believe so,

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No

 

When was you last payment:- circa October 2012

 

Why did you cease payments:- financial difficulties

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they've sold it

if they state they cant give you the info

 

 

tell them under the protection of fraud act & the Data protection act that they legally MUST hold data for 6yrs

and cannot with hold it from you

if you wish me to go phone the information commissioners office and get them to ring you I will

now give me the last payment date please and stop FaFFIn around

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

then under Scottish law its extinguished

about right for capquest

they've no idea Scotland is 5yrs!!

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

can I just check something

you did take this out whilst resident in Scotland 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

then under Scottish law its extinguished

about right for capquest

they've no idea Scotland is 5yrs!!

 

Great news! What's the next step?

 

can I just check something

you did take this out whilst resident in Scotland too?

Yes, I've always been here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the Scottish SB defence

which I think runs.

The following defence is all you need if it is SB

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, Section 6

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract,

in excess of 5 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

under scottish laws the debt is now extinquished

.

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

.

Regards

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 should have one of these already

but if not here it is

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 scroll in the two boxes D1 D2

deleted whats there and insert the SB defence in D1

 

 

d2 can be left blank

 

 

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

Thanks so much. I'll fill out the response form tonight/tomorrow.

 

 

In your experience, will the court look at it and accept it as statute barred and no further action or will this require a court date and that I'd need to seek representation?

Sorry for all the questions :)

 

Just saw your other response, that's really handy thank you very much.

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

proof of what?

 

its for the claimant to prove a debt is NOT statute barred

not for you to prove it IS.

 

anything they produce will also be produced to you well ahead of its involvement in any court hearing

 

TBH: I cant see you going to court at all

the sheriff will most prob throw it out. straight away.

just remember

theres no harm in talking to the sheriff clerk when you put that in to 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

Really? I didn't know that - wow.

 

Ill get that photocopied and send capquest copy tomorrow and drop another into the sheriffs office and keep one for me.

 

Massive thanks for your help. I was a bit worried before I joined this forum because I didn't have a clue what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just remember

its a speculative claim

hoping for a knee jerk action and easy money.

 

DCA's don't care less about any rules

 

 

Kirkcaldy will be VERY familiar with the DCA game

have a chat with the clerk when yo hand it in

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

sadly no

its a numbers game

 

some 800'000 claims across the uk are issued every year

85% go uncontested

its a numbers game.

 

if everyone simply stopped paying DCA/debt buyers tomorrow

the whole industry of debt buying/dca's would collapse overnight.

 

sadly 99% think a DCA is a bailiff

and pay blindly

 

its the biggest sector of the banking industry .

 

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 harm in getting them to check it over for

Then in passing state as its sb'd will I hear anything more?? What's next?

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 put it in last night,

the clerk opened it with another clerk,

had a read

 

 

when I mentioned it was sb"d asked what next

he said that it goes 'to the sheriff who decides if it requires a hearing or not, then you'll hear in due Course'.

 

 

I've just checked royal mail track and trace and Capquest accepted and signed for their copy this morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done

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...