Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by charlie*

  1. Hi asokn Re the Bills of Exchnge Act... if a debt is merely assigned, that surely means it does not change hands, as you explain above, they must be telling lies when they state quite clearly that 'we have purchased your debt'. Are they lying?
  2. We have asked questions in previous threads but all that is in the past, irelevant. The problems now is simple really, our OC could not produce a legible agreement - we made four attempts to get one over a year - they were all copies of the same, all illegible, so we told them no agreement, no money. That was a long time ago. Finally, they issued a faulty DN, by 4 days. They made no attempt to issue a new and corrected DN, we having sent a letter of acceptance asking for the amount of any arrears (as per last year's discussions herein). Eventually they sold the debt to the DC whom we asked for proof of claim - all we got was a cocked up assignment letter and a mockery of a re-hashed default process that should be made a matter of law - we insisted in every letter that there was no debt, no contract. Finally we did an SAR to the DC that was a waste of money, same illegible app form and a bunch of statements - oh, and T&C's dated several years out of date - as were the T & C's we had from the OC. Eventually it went to lawyers who issued a Claim. During this period I was not well (I am 82 and semi infirm) and under the hospital for suspected nasties these last few weeks so I did not do as much as I might have in different circumstances... I did a CPR letter requesting CUPTR(2008) and pointed out certain laws, which I hesitate to mention here - 10 days before the 14 plus 14 days was up having earlier indicated an intention to defend. Our request was ignored so, in my ignorance, I wrote a letter to the court telling them that we could not submit a defense as material evidence was not forthcoming. In due course, a letter from the court arrived stating that a judgement may be made in which case, an app to set aside would need to be requested and paid for. We are still waiting. In essence that's about it. Reading over this it does seem to me that it might not be easy to discuss this matter on CAG because some of the tactics used are not used here and I would not want to cloud any ideas members may have of what CAG can do for them. I think what we need to do is to now get on track regarding court procedures with a view to putting a defense together. I have to say that I am aware of some elements of the 1882 Bills of Exchange Act which clearly states that when a debt is paid off, it is extinguished which links in with the advice given everywhere, DO NOT SPEAK WITH DC's - they try to get you to contract with them... the point being that unless they get you into contract, they have no claim - no contract so as an (alleged) debt is paid off by them, it cannot exist for them to claim from you unless there is an agreement. Now whether this can be used as defense, I do not know - it should be because the Act above is law. So here we are, hanging in space wondering what will happen next... we need to be prepared for the worst, hence this request for advice. Many thanks charlie
  3. Well, for all that, due to circumstances, we did not put up a defense within 28 days following a CLaim from the courts. Instead we wrote a letter which was in their hands by 9.00am of the 28th day explaining a difficult situation and that we had requested certain information from the claimant inlcuding CPUTR that might have helped form a defense. Their reply, short and to the point acknowledged our letter and pointed out that we must have a defense in no later than 28 days following service of the Claim letter OR, judgement MAY be entered against us. (MAY ??) It it is, they continue, we would need to apply to set aside and pay a fee. £80. Having looked at one or two reports herein on defenses, I really don't know that I can handle this - too old, short term memory is shot. Anyway, any thoughts much appreciated. I thought I was being so smart, but, obviously not Thanks charlie*
  4. I just don't believe this.... Before my granson left 6th form at 18 he was given a credit card with a limit of £3000... he was then earning $400 a month as a part time shelf stacker at Sainsbury's, long before he left college. Bit like Toad in Toad Hall, HE HAD TO HAVE A MOTOR CAR. Now he's earning £500 a month elsewhere - no thoughts of uni yet. This is the Abbey National (Santander). Now he's up tohis limit and he has an overdraft too. I don't yet know the full story, but he has been ringing around to see if anyone would give him a better deal like zero rate to start - BUT, on his income for £3000 + o/draft? NO CHANCE - none of them want to know £3000 to his income - never, maybe £1000. Santander say £3000 is the normal credit to start, any age. I ask myself WHY do they seem to be bucking the rest of the industry? Now, having been paying the minimum to Satander is well stuffed and they want him to take out a 5 year loan agreement to cover his two debts. Talk about 'churning'. Now, being a cynic and knowing the real truth about banks - and how the bank employee/bonus/income/to keep your job you must learn to lend system works, I believe he has been deliberately and cynically stuffed by one of the people in the local branch simply to make them look good - maybe they were even warned about a bad lending record. There are people in CAG who know about handling situations like these and I really do beg anyone who has any constructive ideas to come forward and express their thoughts. I know that he should do whatever it takes to keep his record clean - that would be to structure the debt, but, these people really do need shafting - at local level. I am aware that they were [EDIT] even before the spaniards took over. Could it be, I ask myself, all part of building up their structured debt asset (income) value prior to seeking a quotation - which the press reports they are proposing to do - [EDIT] Thanks charlie*
  5. Hi ghost, Yes, I agree, these agreements are promissory notes - financial instruments, that are traded - just like those in America with the sub-prime mortgages - but there must be a reason for our own... Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) 1999 Section 1 sets out the circumstances by which a third party may seek to enforce the terms of a contract Section 2, sub sections 1 - 3 sets out the circiumstances by which a third party can become a third party Section 6, sub-section 1 confers no rights to a third party in the case of Bills of Exchange, Prommisory Notes and other negotiable instruments. It states quite clearly that in order to be a third party, you have to be named in the T & C's. If this counters anything else - CCA S.82A, Law of Property Act etc, then we need to know. Thanks for your input
  6. oops, 'ere we go again... (said the earwig as he fell over the cliff) It would appear that 82A only kicks in on agreements old or new AFTER Feb 2011 What went before and how would it before and/or after tie in with Contracts(Rights of Third Parties) 1999 where third parties must be listed in an agreement/t&c's and cannot be involved in prommisory notes, financial instruments or bills of exchange. Any comments chaps? (all inclusive term, lads and lasses)
  7. Just a quick question for anyone who's passing and in relation to Cabot / Morgan... I see that the BofScotland quotes 16.1 (& 2) in their Terms & Conditions ... "Where any rights of a creditor under a consumer credit agreement (for example the right to be repaid the money) are sold or transferred to a third party, notice of that assignment must be given to the borrower as soon as reasonably possible, except in the circumstances described below. This requirement applies to all regulated consumer credit agreements other than agreements secured on land. New section 82A of the CCA43 - S16.1 etc. It does not indicate who or what third parties or any conditions under which they can buy... Whereas Contracts(Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 indicates - If no third party is identified by name (in the agreement T&C's), thenas indicated under S1, sub-sections 1 - 3 of the above Act (eg: a dca) is not a third party to the contract and therefore has no rights in the matter? S6, sub-section 1 also of the above Act “confers no rights on a third party in the case of contracts on bills of exchange, promissory notes or other negotiable instruments”. (I am given to understand a credit agreement is a negotiable instrument). Can anyone make any sense of this - can a dca buy a debt if he is not listed as per ? Trouble is looming so any comment might also be helpful to Simongee above. “Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State, Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy." Lord Denning:
  8. IMS21... I am very much obliged to you. Best wishes and thankyou charlie*
  9. Item 16 - 16.1 and 2 - BofScot T & C's states they are free to sell a debt.... Then in brackets (Consumer Credit Act 1974) I will follow your suggestion, in the meantime if anyone has a copy or can point to a copy of the CCAct, that would be great - I used to have one - now I can' find one anywhere. Many thanks
  10. ... point to any information or references in the Act that specifically permits OR's to sell debts to third parties. If this is in the wrong place, my apologies. Thanks charlie*
  11. No, done nothing yet - where is the legal forum? - I'll have a good look now see if I can find it ..................... FOUND IT Thanks
  12. Hello all, Is there are particular letter to use to ask the Court to give more time to prepare a defense? Appreciate comments - suggestions. Thanks
  13. If your 'credit agreement' is 2002 and the requirements of s.61 CCA 1974 and subsequent Regulations were not complied with, then the 'credit agreement' is irredeemably unenforceable under s.127 of the 1974 Act (repealed by the 2006 amendments). Based upon the details you have posted here and on your original thread, it appears that you applied for credit by way of Application form and that said s.61 applies, therefore, the 'credit agreement' is unenforceable. The Mould It would be very interesting to know if the above would / might be applicable to Sains 2004 apps/allegd agreements.
  14. I read through the Brandon appeal and the way I see it, he lost - so I'm not sure what you mean - un less there has been something more recent ??
  15. Well chaps, I'd really like to dig a little deeper into this - but I don't have much time left to come up with an answer. If I used the faulty DN (say 5 days short of 14 days) is there any history herein of a DCA challenging that in court? - 'cos if they did and the judge found for them, then the sh-item-toc would sure be flying in this house. Any thoughts - anyone? Many thanks,
  16. Dad of Holly There are differing opinions.... Might I ask why you are so certain. Thanks
  17. Hi BB, yes, I have their NoA - printed by the DC but on the OC's letter heading. As a matter of interest, I did an SAR to the DCA. The very last two statements from the OC did not show the bottom line - all the others did over four years did so I'm going to submit an SAR to the OC - I can't help but feel that the bottom lines might have been deliberately deleted. Thanks charlie* (RS att'd 29 Field - 25pdrs) (RS att'd 2 RHA - Sextons) (then other places)
  18. Well, here we are at AD2012 - I wonder what surprises nasty or otherwise our useless political leaders have up their sleeves for us this year - no doubt we shall find out in due course. In the meantime, I have a problem and would be grateful for a few thoughts on the matter... Mindful of the various changes that the judges have taken upon themselves to come up with over the last year or two, I recall that whilst a Default Notice can be corrected at any time simply by the creditor submitting a new one (as often as he wishes that is until he gets it right) I also seem to recall that if the creditor makes no effort to correct a faulty DN, then terminates, (17 days later in this case) that is the end of the matter and all they can claim are the arrears. The claim of arrears equally applying to a DCA as they have sold it to Caboot who is claiming the whole lot - ignoring the faulty termination. The Default Notice I refer to did not allow the full 14 days for 2nd class post - it was 5 days short. ... and I did accept the termination in writing some months later. Comments of all shades are welcome and appreciated - thanks or otherwise in advance Happy New Year to all - hope all your dreams come true
  19. .... oops, I stand corrected - as to Lawrence, it must be over 50 years since I read the book, all I recall is that I enjoyed it. Hmmm, Assuming is a dangerous business ..... as we have seen over the last couple of years..... faulty agreements, default notices and so-on.... building hopes on quicksand.... still, it's the message in the video that's important. Of course, following these two real oirishers will not suit everyone, it's a way of buying time - and there are those who really are not bothered about anything other than surviving... most especially older people of whom there are a few in this forum.... There is only one way to get rid of alleged debt and that is to study the relevant law, challenge the banks and be prepared to 'stand under' in court.
  20. Can't disagree, but, they are no worse than us, THEY JUST GOT CAUGHT. We haven't... yet! Anyway, I can think of one or two greats to come out of Ireland... Their Union team is quite good, Lt Col Paddy Mayne, DSO and Bar, CO of 2 SAS during WW2 was Irish He was also capped for Ireland before the war. .... then there's "Seven Pillars of Wisdom - the autobiographical account of the experiences of British soldier T. E. Lawrence ("Lawrence of Arabia"), while serving as a liaison officer with rebel forces during the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Turks of 1916 to 1918. Sadly he was killed after the war in a motor cycle accident. Seven Pillars of Wisdom" - the adventures of a brave Irish soldier in the Middle East during WW1 A read I heartedly recommend, especially ex-soldiers. .... and then there was that crafty leprocaun who beat the Bank of Ireland at their own game over his mortgage - his e'book is around somewhere on the internet - can't think of the title.
  21. Over the last year or more and certainly since the Waksman matter in the Manchester Courts last January, the prospects of avoiding alleged debts entirely through faulty application by the lenders of the Consumer Credit Act have become almost impossible. According to couple of Irishmen, there is nothing the mortgage lenders or any lenders or DCA's can do - if the routines explained in this video are followed. I watched it this morning - then I watched it again and paid closer attention... it made absolute sense. THEY CANNOT REFUSE WHATEVER YOU OFFER AND PAY. You simply explain your circumstances and clearly affirm your intent to perform - and pay. Even if you only pay them £1 a month - a week even, they cannot refuse. So long as you perform as per your offer, they can do nothing.... EVEN WITH MORTGAGES - so long as an offer is made and carried out, there can be no eviction. Sure, they can send your £1 back, but you simply re-submit the payment... JUST LISTEN TO WHAT THEY SAY IN THIS VIDEO. Just settle down, grab a pencil and pad - and a cup of coffee - and as the instructors used to say at morse school... "okay chaps, eyes down, look in". Just listen and think about what they are saying. According to this video, IF they do refuse your offer, the debt becomes voided - that, I think, is another matter for another day. The truth of the matter is, the people hold the power, the banks do not, even tho they go to great lengths to have you believe otherwise.. All comments, suggestions, ideas welcome....
  22. Thanks Donkey.... so, DN's and Termination's in any circumstances are totally useless.
  23. In Post #8 above dadofholly said... "Technicaly the account connot be terminated on the back of a faulty DN - but they cannot enforce the agreement in Court with a faulty DN". Is this not a little misleading since it appears the creditor can re-issue a faulty default notice as often as he wishes, in which circumstances, surely, the agreement would become - SOONER OR LATER , enforceable in court. This being so, it's a dead end afore it even starts, surely? Can this be cleared up please... it would be most useful. Many thanks in advance
  24. I keep a rather nasty sword stick at my bedside... as a matter of fact, the hand piece ('knob' ) is made of silver on which my regimemental crest is impressed from the inside - it's nicely made. Pull the handle and out comes two feet of rather sharp steel. My wife keeps a baseball bat on her side - ever since she was woken one night years ago to find a head poking through the window - I was out of the country at the time. As you say.... waiting
  25. Bump... Its been a peaceful if somewhat cool summer and now, as winter approaches, the vultures are circling again so any info regarding the above will be gratefully received.
  • Create New...