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

Letter received: LLoyds Credit Card debt - "account now closed - fully paid" But it isnt?


doomsponge
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2207 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 everyone.

 

Need some a little bit of help.

 

Got a letter from westcot, saying my account with them had been fully paid, and was now closed. And to stop making more payments to them. Also it said the balance was: minus £303.

 

Phoned them up as I thought there was more to pay on this, and the lovely lady, after putting me on hold for a while, explained that the originator of the debt had informed them it had been paid, then retract that message later. She would contact them, to get an explanation. But there was still £1400 owing.

 

Where does this leave me? I have a letter saying the debt is cleared. Can they comeback and say "oops, mistake, keep paying" or is the letter legally enforceable? In the eyes of the law, is the debt now clear?

 

Thanks

 

doomsponge

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they say the debt is cleared in writing, you are entitled to believe that the debt is cleared and if there is record of it on your credit record, to ask the credit reference agencies to correct your record to show it as paid in full

 

Of course the debt owner can come back later to rectify a mistake and if they prove the debt, they have right to enforce it, subject to limitations act and going through the correct process.

 

What is the history of this debt ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

what are you doing blindly paying DCA's and for god sake ringing then up

they are not bailiffs and have zero legal power to demand anything...

 

have you check all the other debts you are blindly paying off via step change are even enforceable??

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

Fair point.

I suspect you may already know the answer to your question.

 

Where do I start?

 

From looking at my credit report, some things have dropped off that im paying for.

 

CCA to the owners of the debts, then post up the results?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep

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 didnt say that, you said you got a letter and the girl on the phone had been informed the debt had been paid and unless she wasnt talking to you that seems like a confirmation of the letter.

 

I read it as you thought there was £1400 still due.

 

If you care to rewrite your first post in a suitably worded and chronological manner so it is absolutely clear who said what and when then advice will be given that fits exactly to the question.

 

Now you have me thinking I have given you poor advice because I read your post as having received a letter, queried it and then got verbal confirmation.

 

really? The girl on the phone did say that the letter was a mistake and there was still money owed. Does this letter trump all others?
Link to post
Share on other sites

you didnt say that, you said you got a letter and the girl on the phone had been informed the debt had been paid and unless she wasnt talking to you that seems like a confirmation of the letter.

 

I read it as you thought there was £1400 still due.

 

If you care to rewrite your first post in a suitably worded and chronological manner so it is absolutely clear who said what and when then advice will be given that fits exactly to the question.

 

Now you have me thinking I have given you poor advice because I read your post as having received a letter, queried it and then got verbal confirmation.

 

Sorry for any confusion. Here is an edited version, making what the girl said more explicitly clear:

 

Hi everyone.

 

Need some a little bit of help.

 

Got a letter from westcot, saying my account with them had been fully paid, and was now closed. And to stop making more payments to them. Also it said the balance was: minus £303.

 

Phoned them up as I thought there was more to pay on this, and the lovely lady, after putting me on hold for a while, explained: "The originator of the debt had informed them, the debt had been paid, but then retracted that message 3 days later. She would contact the debt originator, to get an explanation. But there was still £1400 owing"

 

Where does this leave me? I have a letter saying the debt is cleared. Can they comeback and say "oops, mistake, keep paying" or is the letter legally enforceable? In the eyes of the law, is the debt now clear?

 

Thanks

 

doomsponge

Link to post
Share on other sites

forget what was said on the phone

its inadmissible anyway!

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

Ah good old Estoppel - I once went to Court against a Solicitor who paid me a sum of money when they dealt with a will.

 

After they issued a final account and the service was completed they discovered they had overpaid me and sent a begging letter about 2 months later asking for the over payment back

 

I wrote to them and said the principle of estoppel applies and they refused, insisting I pay the money back.

 

I wrote to them several times asking them why they believed the principle of estoppel didn't apply and they refused to answer and took me to Court.

 

In court I showed my letters to the Judge who agreed with me in principle and then explained why estoppel didn't apply in this case, I thanked him for the explanation and offered to refund the money immediately saying that I only ever wanted an explanation.

 

So no win you might think but the cheeky Solicitor piped up about the matter of their costs at which point the Judge virtually bellowed at them that they should be paying my costs as they had ample opportunity to answer my simple question regarding estoppel.

 

That made me smile all the way home, plus I'd earned a bit of interest on the money while I had it and stuck it to an incompetent solicitor who had been useless throughout their service, but whom I was stuck with because of the deceased's arrangements..

 

Estoppel is basically the principle that mistakes cannot be rectified once the account is declared closed, the same reason that shops have notices that say mistakes in change given cannot be rectified once you leave the shop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...