Jump to content

Edz11

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    655
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Edz11

  1. I can now read the posts (hence the silence) but cannot see the agreements!! way too small... use imageshack!
  2. I'm still having difficulty in finding your signature on anything with the prescribed terms... lol Long look at this tomorrrow (today)
  3. moved now and can read them! - the best thing is too use imageshack to host the scans
  4. Mmmm - what did you put on the allocation questionaire? Have you had one yet?
  5. I'd prefer to wait for their reply to your request first. You'll get a flavour of things then...
  6. Soo - you're all over the place. Can you keep to this thread... See post 2 for the CCA position.
  7. I would pay while waiting for the CCA. At what point would I stop? Ermm, good question. When I was certain they hadn't got one;)
  8. Strictly it isn't a valid CPR 18 request. To be so it has to comply with the CPR's and part of them is that the letter must be headed "Request for information under CPR 18". There are two approaches to defending bare claims. Hit them hard and heavy at every stage. Or subtle and softly softly. The hard approach is defensive but from what I've seen on here it doesn't seem to avoid the problems - such as directions hearings etc. I'm guessing but when the Judge sees the ton of paperwork with long screeds fresh from Northampton he thinks "oh sh!t - I haven't got time lets have a hearing". The subtle approach (it worked for me) was bare minimum of correspondence and so when the Judge looked at it for the first time there was little to look at other than a Claimant that was clearly not prosecuting the claim. The Judge could weigh it up in two minutes and I got a unless order with a strike out. It was struck out. There are risks with every approach. what mood the Judge is in, etc etc. But if the case is pushed onto the pile that is marked "dithering claimant" and it's simple then there's more chance of a strike out if it's simple - so to speak... And I'd ring for the fax number!
  9. I would cut the first bit short. You wrote on xx May 2007 and xx august 2007 asking for a copy of he CCA under S78 and they failed to provide one. You wrote asking for information under CPR 18 on 29 January 2008 after the comencement of Court proceedings. The claimant has failed to comply. Because of the Claimants lack of dillegence the claimant is aware that the proceedings are now caught by Section 78 (6) of the CCA 2004 and that the claimant is not entitled to enforce the alleged agreement . Because of this I'd ask the Court to consider (under its case mangament powers) making an "unless" order that strikes out the claim unless they comply with your CPR 18 request and supply a copy of the executed Credit Agreement containing the precribed terms.
  10. AS above - but the LLoyds and TSb should be CCA'd and without prescribed terms they're unenforceable. Did you CCA the one that went to Court? If you did, what did you get back?
  11. thye'd have to go to court to enforce the agreement and can't if they haven't supplied a CCA...
  12. I should get your fax to Arrow Global ready for sending on Tuesday. Along these lines? I need the following information/documents in order to complete my defence against the claim you have comenced in Northampton County Court; 1) I need a true copy of the executed Credit agreement, containing the prescribed terms, that is referred to in your claim. 2) You are asked to supply the me with a copy of the default notice which must have been issued prior to the commencement of this claim. 3) You are requested to supply me with a signed true copy of the Notice/Deed of assignment of the debt if you are not th original creditor. 4) You are asked to supply me with a statement of account, representing a breakdown of the amount shown in the claim. The statement of account should detail; a) The principal, b) Any and all payments made on the account, c) Any charges, fees and interest charged to the account and (with the exception of charges of interest) a list and details of the actual costs associated with each charge for the last 6 years in order for them to prove that the debt amounts to the amount claimed and that the charge or fee is contractually based. In order that this information is received in time to prepare my defence you are requested to forward it by special delivery business post so it reaches me no later than Friday 22 February 2008.
  13. Tomterm - I'd put this aside till weekend too. Para 10 - as there IS a notice of assignment would it not be best to remove the first part? Para 19 refers to paras 4 & 5. Should that not say paras 3.1 and 3.2 and 13.0?
  14. If there's nothing on your credit record about this then you don't need to bother about the credit reference aspect. They've sent you an unenforeceable agreement so wait until they take the next step if they do anyhthing at all. You could take them to court and ask that the agreement be declared unenforceable under S142 of the CCA or you can wait until they start action against you and they will get it to court where you effectively make the same case.
  15. Start your own thread and scan and post what you've been sent so we can work if what you've been sent is OK.
  16. Proof positive that anyone writing a letter should not partake of a spliff prior to composing one. I think what they are trying to say is "MBNA started the Sh!t on your credit record and we are just doing what they did". Do you know what's on your record exactly?
  17. It's as steven 4064 says... I'd write back saying that you maintain that the agreement is unenforceable and the prescribed terms were not on the signature document. Say that they will be asked to produce the original document should they decide to initiate legal proceedings.
  18. see post 3 They have an unenforceable agreement. Full stop. Period. The end.
  19. There isn't one I think - but check in the templates section (I stand to be corrected). If you have that many cards then we'll be on first name terms in a year or so...
  20. The supplier's panicking now...mmm. You needed him at the start of the court process as he'd have been an excellent witness as proof that you were entering an agreement which meant that it was covered by the CCA. If you signed a hire agreement "But somewhere along the line the three month hire became a 36 month lease hire, and as this is not covered by the CCA I have no rights." then you were duped by the supplier or the person arranging the finance. If the person supplying the goods will say "we both thought it was a supply under the CCA" then the Judge may well have been wrong in law. We need to see ALL the paperwork you've had about this.
  21. Columbo was never in court - so Perry Mason would be better...
  22. I'd write referring to their previous letter and say that you were mis-sold PPI because of... I'd work the two matters seperately when corresponding with the DCA.
×
×
  • Create New...