Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


45 Excellent

1 Follower

  1. A liability order needs to be written down and stamped and sealed by the court , as required in schedule 2 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement Regulations) 1992 SI 613. Have you actually seen it? I doubt it , ask them for Schedule 2 form A. I bet they cannot produce it, as most liability orders are just rubber stamped and no written records are kept, UK law jurisprudence would suggest laws and judgements have to be certain and if they are never written down, how can the liability order be proved or produced? The sheaves of liability orders that local authorities and bailiffs claim to hold cannot be produced – so how do we know that they were ever made or that the debt (and those supposed costs) really exist.
  2. try this http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/craig-ballantine/8/6a6/b8b and http://www.moneysupermarket.com/c/news/who-owns-who/0003118/ I may be wrong, but they did a similar thing to me with another OC and I caught them out
  3. Interesting DonkeyB, looks like good old HFO have shot themselves in the foot again, it seems that Craig Ballantine , Manager of Late recoveries and Debt sales for Lloyds TSB (the money and power behind Sainsburys Bank) only started working for Llloyds in October 2009, so I am wondering why he would have signed the NOA in July 2008 when he was working for HBOS (before the take over).
  4. Ah but can they? I read this somewhere and I must admitt I too am confused having read Carey and this. May 2008, Susan Edwards, Head of Credit Investigations and Enforcement, Office of Fair Trading Misleading statements to debtors Sections 77 and 78 refer to supplying a copy of the ‘executed’ agreement within 12 working days of receiving a written request from the debtor. Failure to do so makes the agreement unenforceable against the debtor until a copy is provided. In addition, if the default continues for a period of 1 month the creditor is in breach of the Act. Execution involves signing the agreement. If no agreement has been executed, it is impossible to supply a true copy of the agreement. Should a creditor supply a copy agreement, even though the debtor has never signed any agreement with that creditor, no indication should be given that it is a true copy or a copy of an executed agreement. To do so may contravene Regulation 5 of the CPRs and be an unfair or improper business practice. The consequence of the debtor not having signed a credit agreement with the creditor is that the agreement is unenforceable except where the court orders that enforcement may take place. Where the agreement was made before 6th April 2007 the court is not able to make such an order unless the agreement was signed by the debtor. Therefore it is misleading to state, when complying with a section 77 or 78 request, that the debtor has signed or would have signed (or similar) the enclosed agreement where the debtor has not done so. From 26 May 2008 such a statement will be a breach of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs). Regulation 5 of the CPRs states that a commercial practice is a misleading action if it contains false information in relation to the main characteristics of the product (amongst other matters) and is likely therefore to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. The product in question is the credit agreement and the main characteristics include the ‘execution of the product’ (Regulation 5(5)(d) of the CPRs). Telling a consumer that he signed such an agreement is also a misleading statement about his rights and the risks he might face as covered by Regulation 5(4)(k) of the CPRs. It is our view that it is likely that a consumer will take a transactional decision to make a payment under the credit agreement or to refrain from exercising his rights under the agreement as a result of being misled about whether he signed it. Breach of Regulation 5 of the CPRs is a criminal offence under Regulation 9 and can also be enforced under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002. Under section 218A of the Enterprise Act, where an application for an Enforcement Order is made the court may require the Respondent ‘to provide evidence of the accuracy of any factual claim’ (such as a claim that a debtor has signed a credit agreement). In addition, it should be noted that threats to take action that cannot be taken is listed as one of the factors that will be considered in assessing aggressive practices in Regulation 7(2) of the CPRs. Section 4. of consumer credit act. Dissemination of information and advice. The [F1 OFT] shall arrange for the dissemination, in such form and manner as [F2 it] considers appropriate, of such information and advice as it may appear to [F3 it] expedient to give to the public in the United Kingdom about the operation of this Act, [F4 the consumer credit jurisdiction under Part 16 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000,] the credit facilities available to them, and other matters within the scope of [F5 its] functions under this Act. So here we go again confusion reigns!!!
  5. Hi Chysun, Silly questions, is this a personal debt to either you or your other half. Is your mortgage in joint names. Cos if the answer to the above is yes , they have not got a hope in hell of getting a Charge against your property the best they could get is a caution and strangly enough you are under no obligation to pay off a caution if you ever sell up. As for HFO well we all love em hello boys.
  6. NP when you get it back, if you do, post it up on here and we can take a look at it, make sure you remove any personal info and account numbers. You will get lots of help on here so dont worry.
  7. Hi PD, first thing is to try to stay calm .I know its easier said than done, but to deal with this lot you need a clear calm head. First thing you need to do is bang of a CCA request to Weightmans, that will then tell you what they are trying to claim on, or if they have nothing. As for going to court without a CCA well if they try I am sure you will get loads of help from the Forum.
  8. OK had a look through your DN and the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and IMHO they fall foul of the following Sch 2 sub section 9A requires this statement You should be aware that if we take you to court and get a judgment against you requiring you to pay us the money you owe us under the agreement, you may have to pay us both the amount of the judgment and interest under the agreement on all the sums owed by you at the date of the judgment until you have paid these in full. This means that even if you pay off the whole amount of the judgment, you may still have a further sum to pay Although your DN has it it is not underlined. Schedule 2 sub section 10A requires this This notice should include a copy of the current Office of Fair Trading information sheet on default. This contains important information about your rights and where to go for support and advice. If it is not included, you should contact us to get one again your DN contains this but it is not underlined. Regulation 6 is pretty clear viz (6) The wording in any such statement shall be reproduced in the notice without any alteration or addition, and in relation to any statement to be contained in the notice the requirements of any note shall be complied with, except that the words "the creditor" may be replaced by the name of the creditor, by the expression by which he is referred to in the agreement or by an appropriate pronoun, and any consequential changes to pronouns and verbs may be used Gonna take a lot to convince a judge though that the DN is defective Hope it helps Copy of the Regs attached Consumer Credit Enforcement Default and Termination NoticesRegulations 1983[1].pdf
  9. With regard to AmEx i would have thought an application under CPR31 for disclosure would get this information, although I am not sure under what part some one would know. The question of the securitisation would be vital to your case, as stated in the other thread I mentioned it seems that AmEx whole business model was based on securitising the cards and loans debts. If as suspected they have securitised them in the USA the Federal Law on securitsation requires that the whole debt is sold "lock stock and barrell" this means they only act as a collection agent. If this is true it would mean they have no legal standing before a UK court. The question is how to get them to admitt to this? Perhaps a N244 application to the court under CPR 31.16 for this information to be confirmed or as the author of post# 7 suggested an affidavit from them declaring the debt has not been securitsed. Without your full knowledge of who actually owns the debt how can you defend it.
  10. Only that if AMex have securitised your Credit Card Debt they may/may not be the legal owners of the debt dependant on where the securitisation took place. If as this thread suggests the securatisation took place in the USA then they are no longer the owners of the debt and have no standing before the UK court. Also if the Debt was sold to a Venture fund as a SPV (Special purpose Vehicle) the actual ownership could be spread over dozens of defferent companies many of which would not have Consumer Credit licenses which is a big NO NO.
  11. have a read of this it might help http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/202474-well-amex-declines-answer.html
  12. May I put my tuppence in? Although they discontinued it does not stop them from selling off the alleged debt to another DCA and you going through the whole thing again with someone else further down the food chain. Your costs are not insubstantial and should put the fear of god up them, however, if you can get them to agree to provide you with an undertaking that they wil not sell on the debt to anyone else and to undertake never to persue the debt again and to remove all information from your credit file with regard to the alleged debt in return for you bearing your own costs would that not be worth it from the peace of mind point of view.? Looking at your fuel costs maybe you could get them to pay that as well? Just a thought.
  13. Thank you, however I could never have done it without all the help and encouragement form all on this wonderful Forum. A special thanks to PT 42Man and Surfaceagent who gave me some sound advice. Thank you all.
  • Create New...