Jump to content


Uncle buck / moriaty law - n279 NoD/Now Assigned to Asset


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1884 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

Creditor does not need to legally terminate the agreement or give notice if the debtor has breached the agreement......

 

In the case of a none defaulted agreement then the creditor would abide by section 98(1) of the CCA19974

 

Duty to give notice of termination (non-default cases).

 

(1)The creditor or owner is not entitled to terminate a regulated agreement except by or after giving the debtor or hirer not less than seven days’ notice of the termination.

 

(2)Subsection (1) applies only where—

 

(a)a period for the duration of the agreement is specified in the agreement, and

(b)that period has not ended when the creditor or owner does an act mentioned in subsection (1),but so applies notwithstanding that, under the agreement, any party is entitled to terminate it before the end of the period so specified.

 

But if you have already defaulted then section 98 (6) provides.....

 

(6)Subsection (1) does not apply to the termination of a regulated agreement by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of the agreement.

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/part/VII/crossheading/termination-of-agreements

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

in regards to the below... what if a different claimant takes you to court after the original claimant sold the debt on after discontinuing?

 

Discontinuance and subsequent proceedings

38.7 A claimant who discontinues a claim needs the permission of the court to make another claim against the same defendant if –

 

(a) he discontinued the claim after the defendant filed a defence; and

 

(b) the other claim arises out of facts which are the same or substantially the same as those relating to the discontinued claim.

regards

hunterandthehunted

Link to post
Share on other sites

Different claimant therefore CPR 38.7 does not apply....although I have never seen it actually happen.....same claim different claimant.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

well i believe TM legal services are about to take me to court on behalf of asset investigations after they purchased the debt off of uncle buck who also took me to court and then discontinued...

 

i received a DN from asset a month ago and i have also just received a letter of claim. i lost a case to them last year even though they didn't show up.

regards

hunterandthehunted

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you would simply defend it on that basis that the debt has already been litigated and discontinued on a previous assignment...and hopefully the court would deal with it as the same claim.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

would it be worth stating that in the letter of claim which i believe i am obliged to fill in.

also are there any threads about with a similar defence so i can research as i can only fine one and that is for when the claimant (also asset) took court action again after it had been struck out.

regards

hunterandthehunted

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afraid not...never seen it happen in 12 years I have been advising...you will be the first.I dont think it would make much difference referring to that fact in your PAP response....they will probably issue irrespective

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

put a spanner in the works

fire off an IRL complaint.

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

on the discontinuation notice from uncle buck it states that the balance due is £0.00, so how can they sell it to asset and also as it has been to court it has already defaulted so how can asset issue me with another default notice.

will they still need to produce the original DN from uncle buck when requested or will the one they issued suffice?

regards

hunterandthehunted

Link to post
Share on other sites

they cant

only the OC can issue a default notice

ignore 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

  • 3 weeks later...

probably section 87 of the consumer credit act. also in the FCA CONC rules I believe.

always has been that way.

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

posts from another thread moved to your existing one about the same issue

please keep to your 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

A DCA cant issue a Default Notice...they are not the creditor..only the original creditor can issue the Notice...which would/should have been issued the default at the time of default.

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 hear and understand what you are saying DX but the fact remains that uncle buck the original creditor did not issue one and the dca asset have issued one and i need to find law referring to that... i cannot just say to the judge your above statement can i...

regards

hunterandthehunted

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it going to court.

i'm sure this has already been answered before here hasn't it.

 

i'll find it later on a tiny screen for now.

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 think its best waiting to see if an actual claim is made before guessing what you might say in court....lets cross that bridge as and when.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...