sgianthebard
-
Posts
139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by sgianthebard
-
I've just checked my credit report on Equifax, Experian and Noddle. There is no record of this loan on my credit report.....Does this mean it no longer exists or what? I am confused....
-
Picture went bust initially and their portfolio was picked up by Webb...then debt was assigned to IDEM. I rceived a letter of assignationand it all appears to be above board.
-
They have no client. They bought the debt from webb resolutions who bought it from Target whou bought it from Picture Ltd who bought it from Picturetheloan
-
UPDATE: I am now in a position to offer all (or almost all) of the arrears on this account. I can start to make the regular monthly payments once I have cleared the arrears , and the loan term will expire in December this year. However, due to the arrears, IDEM have continued to charge interest and will say that I still owe them about £20,000. Some of this (a VERY small portion) will be charges which are possibly able to be claimed back) , but the main part is interest on the outstanding loan piling up due to the arrears. Now, I recall reading somewhere that the courts will not issue a repossession order on interest or charges, only on arrears. So if I clear my arrears, and don't accrue any more until the loan term is complete, is my house safe from repossession? Thanks
-
Misselling of FirstPlus secured loan.
sgianthebard replied to spudafett's topic in Mortgages and Secured Loans
If you are trying to get the debt extinguished due to mis-selling, what money is there to get from the company that a claims firm will take 25% of? -
They WILL try to grind you down by dragging things out : adjourn for 6 weeks to get some documentation sorted , adjourn fvor 6 weeks to let you read thru the documentation they sent you, adjourn for 6 weeks because of a case they have involving children that must take precedence over your case, etc etc . (these are ALL tactics Shoosmiths used against me) What they are really doing here is trying to get as many appearance dates as possible, in the hope that you will not turn up or be late for one of them and they will win the case by default. But they are only kicking themselves in the head, because if they delay past August, and then you get a dismissal for wrong court, or something - the clock starts running and the debt is instantly SB
-
I'm tied up with stuff until Monday, but I'll have a detailed look thru your posts then and if I can give any helpful info gained from my own recent court cases, I'll pitch in
-
I fully expect to get another letter from Arrow, telling me to pay this debt or they may take court action against me. I'll be more than happy to go through this procedure again and get more expenses from them the next time
-
Hi elsi, Can you give any update on this please?
-
Misselling of FirstPlus secured loan.
sgianthebard replied to spudafett's topic in Mortgages and Secured Loans
Can't offer any advice on this just now, but I am thinking of pursuing a similar strategy with my own secured debt. I will watch your thread with interest. Please update regularly -
SB, I'm not sure if someone has mentioned this in the thread so far, but one thing to check on any CCA your opponents may have sent you, is that the credit limit is clearly stated on the CCA. If this is not stated, then they do not have an enforceable CCA, and therefore, no case against you.
-
actually, the rules state that a copy of the agreement must be attached to the summons. BUT...the sherrif can overlook this if he or she is so inclined. BUT, if they overlook this, and yo ueventually lose your case, you will have a point of law to put on your appeal.
-
Today I attended at court for the Proof Hearing. Before I describe what happened, here's what happened yesterday: I received a mobile call from Shoosmiths (acting for Arrow Global). The girl tells me that she has a document on her desk that I asked previously to see, and if I give her my email addy, she will send it to me. I asked her was this a document she intended to produce in court. She says yes. I tell her I am not interested in seeing it and if she tries to introduce it as evidence, I will object as I have not had it 14 days befor ethe date of the proof and it has not been lodged as a production. She then asks me if I would like to think about it and call her later to discuss a settlement. I replied that I'd see her in court. today at court...Pursuer fails to turn up. I make a motion to dismiss and grant Decree Absolvitor. The sheriff says she can't grant a decree of absolvitor, because the case has not been heard but has come up against a brick wall procedurally. I make a motion to dismiss with expenses. Sherriff grants this, and makes me aware that if the pursuer wishes to, they can make a claim again, but will have to start from scratch. I thank the court and walk out Case Dismissed.
-
The clock stops once the case is lodged. If that is within 5 years, even by one day, then the case is not SB.
-
Yesterday I received the productions that Shoosmiths have lodged for the proof hearing. They consist of an unsigned credit card agreement with the terms and conditions attached, and one sheet of paper with dates that the credit card was taken out, my name and address, and a figure that is owed on the account. (I believe this is what they claim is the statement of account.) Proof hearing is in approx 3 weeks time.
-
Any word from beetle?
-
Just an update on my case: I attended court this morning for a proof hearing. The other side mumbled something to the sheriff and the sheriff told me that the case was being put back for 3 months. She gave me a jargoned reason but I didn't understand what she meant and when I asked, she just repeated herself. I think I'll go back to the court building and ask if I can get a transcript of the hearing so I know why this proof hearing was postponed.
-
For the past 5 months, I have been sitting in the public gallery (not non-stop!) of small/summary/ordinary claims to get a feel for the procedures and to try to see what advantages I can gain by with my own arguments. What I have learned is that sheriffs here seem to decide cases using their own common sense and what they personally believe the truth to be. I have seen all sorts of incorrect documentation allowed to be used in cases, and I have seen proper legal arguments with precedents and citations from ACTS being poo-pooed by sheriffs. In cases where it is one person against another, the sheriffs listen to both then try to make the parties compromise. If the parties won't compromise, the sheriff will decide for them and there is no telling which way th sheriff will decide. In cases where it is a lay person Vs a lawyer, in almost all of the cases I have watched, the sheriff rules in favour of the lawyer-represented side, regardless of whether they are defending or pursuing. This is not always because the lawyer has the correct legal arguments. Scottish justice is not a system that relies on following the letter of the law and winning a case because there is a technical transgression of the rules. Scottish justice is a system tat relies on the experience and wisdom of the sheriff coming to a just decision having listened to both sides of the argument. The point I am trying to make here is that if you go to court in Scotland, don't rely on the letter of the law to win your case for you. To add to the above: It seems to me, after watching many, and being involved directly in 2 cases recently, that procedure is regarded as much more important than the content of the arguments. If you get the procedure wrong, you'll lose. That's why the lay-person is at a massive disadvantage to the lawyers. My advice to anyone about to represent themselves in court is to make sure you know the procedure of the court perfectly. Most lawyers I've seen don't have great arguments - they rely on their opponent not knowing the procedure.
-
One point about the rules stipulating that a copy of the agreement must be attached to the writ: Although this is correct, it also states in the the rules that the sheriff can overlook anything that he/she thinks is an oversight or a mistake and allow the case to proceed. This is exactly what happened to me at my hearing. The other side did not attach a copy of the agreement to my wit, so I had the paragraph in the ACT printed out and highlighted for the sheriff and a copy for the other side too, but the sheriff merely glanced at it and said that she was allowing the case to proceed. The other side's lawyer chuckled at me and I got the impression that they were all in bed together.
-
I sent a letter explaining the reasons for the arrears and I made a F&F offer. It has been rejected. The company want me to fill out an income/expenditure form to see what affordable repayments can be made.
-
No agreement was attached to my original summons and I argued that the claimant had broken the rules and therefore I asked for a decree absolvitor, citing the exact paragraph, and giving a copy of the ACT that states this rule to the Sheriff. The Sheriff glanced at it and decided to overlook it and allow the case to continue. (This is the sheriff's right to do this as written in the same ACT)
-
Your case is proceeding pretty much exactly as mine is with Arrow/Santander. Expect at the next hearing the sheriff will not grant your request for a dismissal, but will instead set a PROOF hearing in which the Claimant will need to send you and the court any documents they intend to use at the PROOF hearing as proof that you owe them. They must send you these documents before 14 days before the PROOF hearing. You must also submit any documents or other evidence you intend to produce at the PROOF hearing. You must lodge these with the court (and a copy to the Claimants reps) at least 14 days before the date of the PROOF hearing.
-
I am fully aware that I can claim back charges. That is not the issue I was asking opinions on: I'm looking for opinions on this: If I want opinions/advice on claiming charges back, I will ask for that, but for the moment I wish to concentrate on the above please. Thank You for your input which I do appreciate, and apologies if I sound brusque, but I did explain all of this in a previous post.
-
Because diving in claiming back charges will not look good in the eyes of the court if this company declines my offer of a f&f. I have to make it clear to the court (in the event that it goes there) that I have tried my best to negotiate reasonably with them to settle this. Then it is THEY who will get harsh words from the court for not being reasonable. If I go at them for charges etc then in the court's eyes I will have approached them in a hostile manner and the company can them claim to be the reasonable victims. I have been going to the courts and sitting in the public area watching how much of a difference it makes when one side is seen as trying to be reasonable compared to being hostile. I can tell you for a matter of fact that the demeanour of the claimant and defendant and the manner in which they have conducted themselves in negotiations has far more weight in the court's decisions than any point of law. Decisions are always at the discretion of the court, and even citing a precedent will not get you a better result. Sad, but true.
-
Yes dx, I could claim for all the fixed sum arrears charges and any other fixed penalty charges. But if I'm going to try to negotiate a reasonable settlement with them, it might be better to tackle this (initially) in a way that is not combative. That's why I'm asking if anyone has an opinion on whether this method will be a better way to go than to dive straight in claiming back charges etc.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS