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

Capquest/Shoos Simple Procedure Claim - old ISME Shop Direct CAT debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2342 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

I need help/assistance regarding a Simple Procedure claim that was posted through my door on Thursday 5th October by Sheriff Officers.

 

The claim by Capquest/Shoosmith is regarding a catalogue debt which I believe should be statute barred as the date that a default was issued was 10/07/2012.

 

I suffer from a long term illness and also depression and around that time was in and out of hospital frequently and for one reason or another, ignored the debt!

 

Capquest/Shoosmith are now pushing to recover the debt which was initially owed to shop direct for the sum of £449.37.

As I rely solely on benefits, I am unable to pay this without putting myself in further financial difficulty.

 

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Top of the morning to you and welcome to CAG :)

 

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

Fill that in and paste back here in a new post.

 

We can then advise :)

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

name the issuing court:Kilmarnock Sheriff Court

Who Is The Claimant: Capquest

 

Who Are the Solicitors: Shoosmiths

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

What is the claim for – Catalogue debt

1.The said contract between the original owner and the respondent is a regulated credit agreement in terms of section 189 of the consumer credit act 1974.

It is dated 22/05/2010 and relates to a mail order account issued by the original owner for isme with account number ********.

 

2.On numerous occasions between 22/05/2010 and 10/07/2012 the respondent utilised the credit facility created under said agreement by purchasing goods and services on credit using the facility.

The original owner issued statements in relation to the account on a regular basis upon which would be stated the current balance the minimum payment which would be required to be made in terms of the said agreement and the date by which said payment required to be made.

By the nature of the said agreement the payments to be made each month fluctuated from month to month depending on use.

 

3.It was a term of said agreement that a failure to meet any payment on a due date would render the account in default and would entitle the claimant to serve a notice of default on the respondent requiring the respondent to remedy the breach within 14 days failing which the agreement would be terminated.

On or around 10/07/2012 the respondent failed to make payment of a sum which had fallen due and the said account thereby entered into default.

A default notice was issued to the respondent on 10/07/2012.

 

4.The respondent failed to remedy the default following upon service of the said notice and the account was accordingly terminated in accordance with that notice.

The account remains in default.

 

5.The sum due in terms of the said agreement amounts to £449.37.

The right to receive payment of the sums due in terms of the said account vests in the claimant.

 

look for the words which FOLLOWS [substantial connection with Scotland]

 

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

 

Last Date Of Service:- 27/10/2017

Last Date For Response:- 17/11/2017

 

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 debt

 

D5 what has the claimant said]:

I want the court to order the respondent to pay me the sum of £449.37

 

from your knowledge: answer the following:

 

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

 

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? I believe so

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

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

When was you last payment:-Around 10/07/2012

Why did you cease payments:- Illness and 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 plan No

Link to post
Share on other sites

brilliant thank you perfect

 

can you go ring Shop Direct and find out your last payment or order date.

looks like this is statute barred

easy to kill it dead.

 

no rush to do anything further 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

ignore me.

 

 

wrong file uploaded.

 

 

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

enter this in box D4 of a download copy of form 4a

post 2 here

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?476735-The-Simple-Prodedure-Rules-For-Claims-Under-£5k-in-Scotland-From-Nov-2016

 

 

send it to the Sherriff clerks office

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

nicked from Andyorch

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

belt and braces

 

 

you did take this out whilst resident in Scotland and not south of the boarder in England or wales

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 again,

No, I have always resided in Scotland,

Please forgive me, but in your previous post, what exactly do I enter in box D4 of form 4A, box D4 asks Which additional respondents do you think should be responding to this claim?

Do I need to tick C3, I want to dispute this claim?

Many thanks in advance

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry D1

 

 

yes ofcourse you dispute it c3 tick

the debt doesn't exist, under scotiish law its extinguished...dead gone parrot

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 to clarify, I put this in D1

 

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

 

I tick C3 disputing the claim

Do I enter anything in D2 Why should the claim not be successful?

 

Apart from filling in my personal details and what you have instructed me to, do I simply hand the form into the court?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as there is no rush

you have until November to respond

it might be better you get upto speed

there are numerous PDF's on the scot.gov website on what you need to do

 

but for simplicity

we have them here

 

go read...

 

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?476735-What-To-Do-Simple-Prodedure-Rule-Claims-Scotland&p=5017400#post5017400

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Could I have one more piece of advice, please?

 

I have completed form 4A, in connection with the matter above, and about to submit it.

 

However, when reading through page one of form 6A, there is a paragraph entitled WHAT SHOULD YOU DO NEXT. There is a sentence that states,you must send a completed response form to the court and to the claimant.

 

Does this mean that I must photocopy form 4A and send it to Capquest, or would it be to Scott and Co, the Sheriff Officers, and if so should I send it "signed for"?

Many thanks in advance,

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

ask away always.

 

the copy goes to the CLAIMANT

it can go by 1st class with free proof of posting from any po counter

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Update regarding the above case:

 

Having submitted form 4A to the court with all the relevant details advising of the date of the debt and stating that the debt should be statute barred,

I was somewhat taken aback this morning as I received a form SO1,

stating that the respondent has indicated to the court that the claim will be disputed!

 

I have been ordered to attend a case management discussion on 26th January 2018!

 

Surely the debt is statute barred?

 

Apparently the claimant and I are encouraged to contact each other to seek to settle the case or narrow the issues in dispute before the case management discussion.

 

Should I contact Capquest or not?

 

Any advice would be very much appreciated!

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

as expected

 

there is no point in contacting them

its statute barred end of.

 

its only a chat IF it happens at ALL.

 

the sheriff might well dismiss the case if the fleecers provide no written evidence the debt is not SB'd.

sit on your hands.

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

Many many thanks for your advice, it's truly appreciated.

 

There's one thing that I am puzzled by, perhaps you can explain?

 

As the debt is statute barred,

why did the sheriff not declare it so,

and instead arrange for a case management discussion?

 

regards

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

evidence its not statute barred..

 

the sheriff has no knowledge nor legal access to such information

until/if the claimant claims otherwise

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...