Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/08/14 in all areas

  1. Your very welcome, and no real need to thank me, the praise goes to this wonderful collection of information and the help that is provided. Just been looking around and the amount of users saying they will donate but seem to vanish seem unfairly large. This resource would be missed by many if it was lost. The fact that some people have saved thousands and can't spare just a few quid has me quite rattled. Although a donation is just that and its down to personal choice. Rant over....... Thanks again.
  2. You would think they would send the documents they are relying on .. but they dont, and you will likely be fighting tooth n nail to get anything .. Can you please have a read of hte link below and provide us with the answers in this thread that way we can advise better. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-April-2014**(1-Viewing)-nbsp
  3. Sounds like cabot are doing their usual trick of trying to get a CCJ by default and then saying theyve contacted you multiple times. Sit tight and someone will be around to help asap. Also, did you have an issue with MMF? Or just cabot? That way we can get the thread into the right forum for max visibility.
  4. In addition to the advice above, you should understand that this letter is now unlawful under the recent FCA CONC rules. First credit is acting unlawfully by sending you a letter which is not specific and could lead you to misunderstand the purpose of their contact. Have a look at the CONC rules and in particular have a look at this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?426126-CONC-7.9-Contact-with-customers-including-visits first credit often monitor this forum and so if they see this post, then they should have a look also at the links I have given which eventually go to the FCA website and they can see that they are acting unlawfully. Once this matter is settled, I would suggest that you make a complaint to the ombudsman First credit have been the subject of official disapproval in the past. It looks as if they have forgotten their lesson and they want to go that way again. Oh dear.
  5. Hi, Wait until they send full details of the alleged debt through the post in the next week or so. Please DO NOT ring 1st Crud on the telephone, the so called "helpfull advisers" have in reality failed at everything else in life that they have tried to do, they are employed on minimal wage with a commission top up & collection enhancements. They do not care about your circumstances & will only threaten, bully & intimidate you into paying. Also, If 1st Credit ring you, you are under no legal obligation to speak to them, refuse to go through the security questions. Keep everything in writing. If 13 years have elapsed then the debt is well & truly Statute Barred. Also, might be worth your Husband obtaining a copy of his Credit Reference File in-case anthing has been slipped on. Stigman
  6. Particulars of Claim 1.THIS CLAIM IS FOR £6982 THE AMOUNT DUE UNDER AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND THE DEFENDANT TO PROVIDE FINANCE AND/OR SERVICES AND/OR GOODS. 2.THIS DEBT WAS ASSIGNED TO/PURCHASED BY LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD ON 27/06/2013 AND NOTICE SERVED PURSUANT TO THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 PARTICULARS RE: SHOP DIRECT-LITTLEWOODS AC NO xxxxxxxx AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £6982 3.THE CLAIMANT ALSO CLAIMS interest PURSUANT TO S69 county court ACT 1984 FROM 27/06/2013 TO DATE AT 8% PER ANNUM AMOUNTING TO £520 Defence 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. 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. 2.Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Littlewoods but any alleged balance is and remains in dispute and disputed unfair penalty/interest charges. 3.Paragraph 2 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over 12 months ago. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied the claimant cannot add section 69 interest to any alleged balance until it secures judgment and is at the discretion of the court should 8% be allowed. 5.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14.Further more the claimant has failed to respond to a section 78 request and is therefore in default and therefore not permitted to request any relief until such time they can comply,therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 6.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7.On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 8.By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. You have numbers now....look at number 2 of the defence.As Im unaware of the nature or dispute with this claim you will have to edit to suit. Also have they added the £520 into the total claim or is it just showing? Regards Andy
×
×
  • Create New...