Jump to content

clarity99

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

3 Neutral

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Is there a problem with this thread- I cannot see the full thread and Mantis Shrimp's posts are missing?
  2. thank you for taking the time to look at it all- I'm just in from 12hr-shft, so will need couple hours to process.. So a simple defence of no DN and S87 so I shouldn't need to bother with my original plan of CCA1974 S75 protections and CRA 2015 s55 and s56 to cancel out the debt as repeating was no longer convenient to consumer so full refund..... C
  3. it is Mantis- I needed help understanding whether it applied in this instance, as you'll see from the redacted documents I'm about to put up.... The Claimant says not.... I thought otherwise....
  4. thanks Mantis - it was my error all along. It should always have read as s75a not s75 as this is a linked credit agreement! My apologies to all ...... C
  5. this was a telephone customer service representative- instead of the usual complaints he gets, he says he really enjoys cancelling PCNs. Made out it was an Aldi policy, so hats off to them.
  6. Edit- Oh dear- just re-read the Subject Access Request file from Original Creditor and it produced copies of "Sums in Arrears - 09072018" and a "Notice of Default - 07092018" - none of these were received.
  7. So my bulleted defence is: i) No Defualt Notice served on Defendant by Original Creditor ii) failures by Original Creditor renders the assignment defective? iii) Service never provided by Provider... now liquidated iv) Claim should be dismissed any more than that?
  8. OK- so I now see that s75 applies to credit cards and there wasn't any payment made by credit card.......so no protection there. There is the linked agreement I posted that provides similar protection....... Andy- are you saying there is NO defence to an assigned debt? C
  9. Hope so Dave and especially if Google picks up this thread - I'll keep looking for the original PCN, and post it up if I find it. I could post up my Appeal, but as it wasn't even looked at it probably has no value. C
  10. 75 Liability of creditor for breaches by supplier. (1)If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or (c) has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor. I'm confused, if this is a CCA retail finance agreement used to purchase a training course and the course wasn't provided, how can Assignor chase debt but not be required to meet their s75 obligations? Monday
  11. Thank you Andy Definitely no Default Notice from Assignor or the Assignee... so that's a one line defence, thank you So with s75 as Shrimp is being sued for the full loan paid direct to Provider, if they're expected to pay then the Assignor/Assignee should provide a suitable alternative ie they're responsible per s75........ have I got this wrong and s75 will only apply if the Assignee is successful in Court and Shrimp has to pay and is then in loss? As it is the Assignee who is suing..... can any of the defects with the Assignor be used in my Defence? Does the Assignee also need to serve a Default Notice?
×
×
  • Create New...