Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 160 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

Intrum trying to enforce a decade old HSBC debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1551 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! I'm a new user here and this seemed the right category to post this to.

Sorry if I was mistaken.

 

my fiance got a letter from Intrum earlier today, trying to enforce a debt of £1529.81 they had purchased from HSBC.

 

My fiance recalls she had paid off - and closed the account - about 8-9 years ago, what at the time amounted to £500. Said account is not present on her credit file (looked up on Clearscore who gets their info from Equifax) and as such no default notices either.

 

Ironically, the 'change of ownership' letter says that they (HSBC) have taken all the necessary steps to reflect the change of ownership on her credit file. Said letter is dated 15/3/2017 and been bundled with Intrum's demand of the debt.

 

Since the debt is - if it's even legit - must be over 6 years old, and she hasn't been in contact with HSBC ever since, we were thinking about outright ignoring the letter. Would that be safe to do so?

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably a managed loan

 

Moved to the hsbc forum

 

Sent intrum our sb letter from the debt collection section of our library

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!

 

Written up the SB letter and will send it first thing tomorrow morning.

 

Interesting to see though that after re-reading the letter there is absolutely nothing mentioned about 'consequences'.

 

No threat of legal action, as that would get them in trouble

. The only thing it says that if they don't hear from us, one of their customer support representatives would contact us about repayments.

Hopefully the letter will stop that from happening.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

under conc rules they must cease all comms.

if they agree its sb'd

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...

Hi everyone!

 

Today we received a reply from Intrum claiming that the account were receiving payments up to October 2016. It is extremely unlikely, and here is why.

 

Intrum is using my fiance's maiden name, which she changed in 2013.

So why they don't know her current name if the account has been receiving payments till 2016?

 

Also, the account has been defaulted in April 2011 (according to them), and the debt been sold to them in March 2017, just 5 weeks before becoming statute barred.

Not sure why HSBC would sell on a debt that was still being paid in 2016.

 

What I find the weirdest though, is that Equifax has no record of this alleged debt - as it should be as the account is supposedly closed in around 2009.

 

My only theory for its existence would be that HSBC somehow failed to close the account and some sort of management fee brought it into negative balance, and that somehow - interest maybe? - ended up in that 1500 GBP debt.

 

One thing is sure though, we don't really want to pay off an account that was supposed to be closed for almost a decade now!

 

What steps should we take next?

Request the information that they have on that account?

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably packaged account fees

Using the hsbc number intrum are quoting

Go ring hsbc and ask last payment date

 

I will suspect the statements they intrum have sent are not on hsbc headed paper but some ptintout from intrum database???

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

If a debt was defaulted more than 6yrs ago it will no longer show on credit files

 

Go ring hsbc

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

My fiance doesn't really want to deal with HSBC as it is from an era of her life that was quite traumatic and she's still dealing with the stress of it.

 

Can I call them on her behalf without answering a load of security questions?

 

Also, can Intrum do anything worse that the annoyance of sending letters ad nauseum or do they have any legal powers?

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

They have no more powers than you or i if we think someone owes us money..issue a court claim

 

A dca is not a bailiff

And have

ZERO legal powers

 

Hsbc wont care theyve sold the debt

Just go ring them you can ask whatever you like with her permission after she verifies herself

 

Else send hsbc a free sar and wait 30 days

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

  • 1 year later...

Hey there!

 

We have requested an SAR from HSBC, and sent a letter to Intrum asking them to prove ownership of account.

 

As it turns out (from the documents received), the account was actually paid through some form of debt management

- £1 a month - up to October of 2016, *but* there was no signed agreement.

 

Today we received a letter from Intrum essentially admitting that they can't produce the requested document (the signed agreement), but they still would like to pursue the debt.

 

they completely dropped the threat of court from their letter.

 

My question is just this :

can we safely ignore them considering they failed to prove ownership of the debt

- despite that it's only going to be statute barred in October 2021?

 

Thank you for your reply in advance

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

correct

 

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

  • 1 month later...

Hey there. Sorry for necroing my thread yet again, but Intrum - after a couple months of the regular harrassment letters - has returned to legal threats, despite their lack of a signed contract to prove ownership of debt. The only difference this time, that instead of a direct threat (we will take the case to court - as they said last time), they changed their wording to "we may pass your account to our internal Legal Department for review which may ultimately result in County Court proceedings being issued against you".

 

I just wondering if they would actually start any legal action if they have no chance to win in court? Also, I thought having threats of legal action while having no grounds (no means to prove debt) is illegal.

 

Is there anything can be done to make their threats stop?

 

Thank you for your reply in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Is there anything can be done to make their threats stop?

 

Yes......ignore them unless you receive the following.....then come back for further advice.

 

 

Andy

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...