I haven't heard anything from Lloyds themselves for around 10 years, since they wrote to me saying they were writing off the debt.

I don't have any refererence numbers or anything to call them with.

You said to leave sending a CCA until nearer the last date for answering the claim.

Is there any reason for that, rather than sending now I mean?

I was just thinking that whatever debt it is they are chasing for, the details will be in the copy of the credit agreement they send out.

If they don't send anything then I can always refer to that fact when it comes to expenses of the case, if they force me to lodge a response by not answering the CCA.

Because the CCA gives them a number of days to respond that might take it beyond the claim response date, would I be aswell writing to Shoosmiths saying something like "I have no idea what credit agreement you are referring to, please send me a copy of the agreement you intend to produce within 7 days. You're failure to do so will be founded upon in relation to the expenses of this claim"?

I know you said never to contact the fleecers but it's kind of out of their hands now if Shoosmiths are pursuing it and it's their solicitor who gets paid the expenses.

oO if you see what I mean, there doesn't seem to be any benefit to ignoring them now that a claim has been raised, so long as I don't admit to having any knowledge of what they are talking about?

Sorry if I'm not understanding correctly.

no you don't go doing anything yet

in post 13 I gave you links to threads to read

have you read any of those..

you appear not to have unless you've done it whilst not logged in here

please remember a DCA or their fake/tame paper solicitor has no more legal powers than you or I if we think someone owes us money..issue a court claim.

does the claimform state an account number?

I did open the link you gave me the other day but malware bytes stopped me from opening the pages.

I realise now I was accessing the links at the top of the page which I see now that I'm on the PC ( I was on my phone before) are advertised links.

I can open up the links below to the CAG threads and I'll have a read tonight.

Yes, the claim does state an account number.

I hadn't clicked when I first read it but it's 14 digits long

- the same as a sort code+ 8-digit acc number

- and when I typed in the first 6 digits into sort code finder it comes up with TSB in the city I used to have my Lloyds TSB loan

- so it looks like it is LLoyds after all.

Sorry if I seem like I'm not concerned/moving quickly enough

- I am but my partner and I are on annual leave just now and I don't want to worry her with this so I'm only posting/reading when she's not around to see what I'm doing.

And thanks for the links dx100uk, those responses are pure gold!

that's ok good.

so go ring Lloyds Monday. ask last payment date

if they start giving you security issues or crap like they don't hold the info

tell them that under:

the prevention of fraud act

and

the data protection act

they MUST hold info for 6yrs

and if they don't give it to you - as soon this call is over you'll be straight on the phone to the information Commissioners office and will be raising a serious formal complaint about them and seeking financial compensation.

ask to speak to a supervisor if you still get stomewalled

Thing is though, the last i heard from them s around 10 years ago, so they might legitimately not have the details anymore. Still worth doing?

8 years at least i think.

If you think worthwhile though I'll call then tomorrow.

if i get last payment date from them it may only be the last payment to them

ie i may have paid a fleecer for a while, though i don't remember it

ring lloyds see what they say

poss get the assignment date to prime?

they'll be no harm in ringing prime either

same rules apply to them.

just don't ring cabot/shoo's

Maybe stating the obvious, but remember it's Statute Barred in 5 years rather than 6.

No extinguished totally!!

But need resonable proof please first

I finally got talking with someone helpful at Lloyds today, having previously waited 2 weeks for a useless letter that simply confirmed when my old current was closed, which I had already been told on the phone anyway.

Just to summarise,

Cabot's claim refers to a loan agreement with "the original lender" being Prime Credit 1 s.a.r.l. and that the loan agreement (which they say they have and will produce) is dated 23/01/2009.

They give an account number for the loan agreement.

They say I breached that loan agreement on a date on 27/11/2007 (oddly, that's 2 years after the date they give for the credit agreement which obviously isn't possible).

They say that they bought the debt from Prime Credit on 29/7/14 and that it was intimated to me on or around 29/7/14 (possible but I don't remember it). Cabot say that in terms of the agreement they are entitled to payment of sums due in terms of "said account".

Today I found out as follows:-

The loan account number they refer to is actually an old current account number, which was closed on 25/11/2007 and was never with the collections team so no assignations or collection attempts for this account number (maybe it had an overdraft but I don't recall).

Therefore there is no such loan agreement with the account number they refer to.

The guy did confirm that I had a loan account with Lloyds which has a different account number and that was closed on 27/11/2007, having been put in default the same day.

He said that the debt was sold to Apex credit management on 26/4/2013 (he's not sure if it was assigned. As I remember it, Lloyds wrote to me saying they had written off the loan and I didn't hear from them again, if that helps) so it was sold to them more than 5 years after default/closure and less than 6.

It is entirely possible during the period up until roughly 2009 or so that I was making payments to a debt collector of some sort for that loan, but fooloshly I was paying a lot of debt collectors at one point and can't be sure.

As it stands they are claiming for a loan account which was a current account and had no loan attached, that they say was entered into a credit agreement with "the original lender" prime credit when I didn't ever have a loan agreement with them that I know of (it was Lloyds).

They say the agreement was dated 23rd Jan 2009 but somehow the default on that agreement was 2 years prior on 27/11/2007 (which is the correct date of default on the loan agreement with lloyds).

They have the wrong account number for the loan, the wrong original lender and the wrong date for the credit agreement, but the right default date for a loan account with a different number.

They also say they were assigned the debt from Prime credit when it was Apex Credit management who Lloyds say they sold the loan to (and possibly assigned to).

Am I right in thinking that unless the debt was assigned to Apex then assigned to Prime Credit, prime credit never had any rights in the first place to then assign to Cabot?

Either way, Prime credit was never the original lender and I don't see how they can produce a credit agreement with them.

It is possible that (again foolishly I know) I paid some money to prime credit in respect of the debt to lloyds, but I can't be sure and I wouldn't have had a credit agreement with them. They certainly weren't the original lender for the CCA.

The date I need to respond by is 18th August and I am away with the kids for a few days next week, so unless you guys recommend otherwise, I was thinking I'd submit a response saying all the usual stuff about the claimant being a debt purchaser etc plus

(1) that I don't recall ever entering a loan agreement with "the original lender",

(2) I don't recall ever having held a loan account number xxxxxx (the number they refer to in the claim) and possibly pointing out,

(3) that I can't have defaulted on a credit agreement in 2007 that they allege I entered on 2009 (if that's not being too sarcastic) and

(4) that the claimant has no legal right to any payment under the terms they refer to.

Does that sound like the best way forward, ie denying their claims but not giving any unnecessary clarification?

Also, should I go ahead and issue a CCA to cabot in the meantime?

Or just ask in my response for them to produce the documents they say they have?

There is also the issue of whether the claim is time-barred under scottish rules, or whether me possibly having paid a DCR at some point after default (and if so whether it was prime credit I paid) would interfere with that.

quick thought is i'd go with SB'd

was this taken out whilst resident in Scotland or England.

sorry if you've Answered this before...

Thanks dx, I'll mention statute-barred. Should I just say something like "even if I had entered said agreement with the original lender, having defaulted on 27/11/2007, the claim would be time barred under statute " or such like? Should I add in the other comments I was thinking of making too?

No probs, It was made in scotland yes, and it would have been signed before 6th April 2007 so section 127(3) of CCA would apply fwiw.

Should I send the CCA request aswell or just request the documents in my response, since they've said they will produce them anyway?

if its Scotland the debt is extinguished [dead gone parrot] after 5yrs

let me review things later

and i'll recommend actions.

OK thanks.

Yeah I knew about the 5 year rule but had it in my head that if I had been making payments towards the debt after the default then the 5 year clock only starts running from the date of the last payment (I don't know if it matters who the payments were made to though).

I double checked the response date and it's actually 15th August not 18th, so I'll try and send it late tomorrow afternoon by email to the court and next day post to the claimant.

Also, prime credit are referred to as the "original owner" not "original lender" so my apologies for that. Obviously I still have never entered a credit agreement with PC as they say, even if they bought the debt from apex, who bought from LLoyds.

They also refer to having entered a "contract" with the respondent and don't say it was a credit agreement.

I'm guessing that alludes to an agreement to pay instalments or something?

If I had done that over the phone which is how I would have done it if at all,

I assume that can't be classed as "entering a contract"?

If Lloyds are saying that they sold the debt in 2013, it seems impossible that it could have been assigned to PC in 2009 as it would still have been with LLoyds at that point.

it's possible that PC tried to collect payments etc but had never been assigned the debt and therefore had no legal right to recover payments at the time and never did, if it was eventually sold to Apex?

Sorry for all the addons, they're just ideas I'm having as I prepare my response.

Well forget about all that

You will only be responding as in post 4 here

We will add in a statement that says..i have never had any consumer credit under or with the stated original owner prime credit. The claimant cannot hold any signed agreement as they state.

Post 4, In which thread?

Here's what I came up with based on the template you linked me to a few weeks ago. I'm happy to change it in any way you see fit.....

D1

As a respondent I specifically make reference to the Simple Procedure Rules 2016 in so far as my understanding is that with regard to the following rules:

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 would welcome any assistance the sheriff can give me.

I would respond to the claim as follows:-

My understanding is that the Claimant is a well known Debt Buyer or debt collection agency that purchases large debt portfolios 'En-Masse' from creditors for a greatly discounted Pence to Pound value.

These debt portfolios, be them direct from the Original Creditors or exchanged under sales between other Debt Buying Organisations, are sold by the original creditor because the Original Creditor neither wished to litigate against their customer themselves due to bad publicity or are typically related to issues of enforceability under the Consumer Credit Act or are as a result of inflated sums due to penalties and or interest levied upon them that are unfair & unlawful under FCA regulations.

According to s.189 of the consumer credit Act 1974, when an assignee purchases debts [or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement] it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements, such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information. The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement, thereby ensuring that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

I respond to the specifics of the claim as follows:-

(1) I do not recall having ever entered into a contract under s189 of the Consumer Credit Act with Prime Credit 1 s.a.r.l.

(2) I have never held a loan account numbered xxxxxxxxxxxx

(3) I do not recall having received a notice of assignation on or around 29th January 2014

(4) It is denied that the claimant has any legal right to payment from me for the balance claimed under any alleged contract.

(5) In any event, the stated claim is statute-barred under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973.

The Respondent puts the Claimant to strict proof to 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

The Default Notice Issued By The Original Creditor Under CCA 1974 Section 87/8

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, they have arrived at the balance now claimed.

The court will be aware that penalty charges and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009).

I will contend at any hearing that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

Ah auto links are down

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?476735-What-To-Do-Simple-Prodedure-Rule-Claims-Scotland

Dont add to it your above is for later!!

Thing is, they're not saying that they hold a credit agreement with PC,

they're just saying I entered "a contract" with them under s189 of CCA.

It's all very vague and makes no sense as you read it.

They're simply saying that PC owned the right to recover and sold it to them, without referring to who assigned it to PC, or who assigned it to the company before them/who the original creditor assigned it to.

Ok got you, the link is there now.

I'll add in something like

"i have never had any consumer credit on under or with the stated original owner prime credit. The claimant cannot hold any signed agreement as they state." to the bare template as you suggest and send it off to court/claimant tomorrow.

Only add the red bit

Perfect, will do thanks.

SO I want to save the statute-barred aspect for later also?

We dont know it is

Let the claimant hang themselves

Sure as eggs if you even speaking with lloyds and you cant work things out, the claimant will have twice the trouble

Dont lose sight of the fact that it was a speculative claim not expecting a defence

Ok, will keep it simple, thanks.

don't forget CCA request too.

Ok i will send that tomorrow aswell.

This what I'm putting in for section D2. Please let me know if I should be adding anything else. Thanks.

D2

1. The respondent is not aware of any contract with Prime Credit or the claimant under the Consumer Credit Act that would give rise to a legitimate claim to payment form the respondent.

2. The claimant has not produced the required documentation under Consumer Credit Act to demonstrate any legal entitlement to enforce and bring this claim to court.

Yeah I knew about the 5 year rule but had it in my head that if I had been making payments towards the debt after the default then the 5 year clock only starts running from the date of the last payment (I don't know if it matters who the payments were made to though).

Do you know when you last made payment?

Reading the thread I think you said it was at least 8 years ago,

then elsewhere maybe you're saying 2009 (which comes to the same thing).

Do you now think that you made payments more recently?