Looking at the Judgments in that list, only 1 of them that went the Consumer's way was not in a "County Court". County Court judgments don't help much do they. Anything can happen there (and does from personal experience!) LOL. I look forward to what cometh from those upon high.

I have gone through the list of cases http://www.oft.gov.uk/about-the-oft/legal-powers/legal/cca/CCA2006/unfair/unfair-rel-full/ none of the ones that has gone the Consumer's way seem to say anything substantial though. Seems to be a bit of a lottery the whole thing.

Like any Jones or Smith that has a common first name too, I have had my credit file searched by a debt collection company seeking someone else. Sometimes these searches are an Equifax Table 1 "Outstanding Debt" search and stay on your credit report for 2 years and may not have anything to do with you. (Any idea how many "David Smiths" are born each day?") I fear such searches on the report could effect a credit score or for instance if you apply for a mortgage and they search you and they see someone has looked at your file looking for someone for "outstanding debts" it can't be seen in a positive light. I am curious as to what information the DCA gets when they search your file in this manner and how they can legally search it. I realise that any credit agreement anyone enters into, be it a loan, mobile phone, bank account, credit card, mail order, store card, etc. you sign to say your data can be used to "trace debtors". This is a cartel agreement, no credit agreement exists that doesn't contain this term and if you do not agree to this term your application will be rejected. So does having any sort of credit account imply that you agree to your personal data being used to trace a debtor, even if it is not yourself and no connection to yourself? What agreements do the creditors have with the CRAs with regards to this? How much personal information do the CRAs give out. I am concerned how my data is used and I do not trust DCAs. I do not see why they should have access to my data when I am not the real person they seek. There is no getting out of it, no credit agreement exists without this clause.

The CPUTR look good for the consumer but don't the non-compliances with it need to be enforced by the OFT? I have no faith in the OFT. What they do and what they say all seems to be secretive like they are some sort of secret police. The legal things they do, do, they seem to mess up (see bank charges). I keep sending complaints to them for what it is worth though..... Anyone know if they have ever revoked a DCA's license?.... Thought not. I would be for getting rid of the OFT and Information Commissioner (QUANGO ALERT!) and putting more power in the hands of the consumer to seek penalties against non-compliant companies. Another thing, I just looked at the OFT's website with regards to "Unfair Relationships" under the CCA 2006. I couldn't find anything that has got to the court that has been decided in the consumer's favour as being an "Unfair Relationship". So WTF is an "Unfair Relationship"? LOL

I think he has already filed that form in to get to this stage and it was the other way round, the guarantor admitted and the tenant not responding.

He can't use MCOL as he has gone for an "unspecified amount not exceeding £15k". What you need to do is make a list of everything you are claiming for, list of rent payments missed, backing it up with a copy of the lease, g'tee, invoices for repairs, photographs etc. You need to quantify everything and back it up with evidence. You basically need to pursuade the Judge it is just for you to receive the specific amount you are claiming, whatever that is going to be. It would have been easier to have gone for a specific amount originally and you might have your default judgment now for a specific amount in order to apply for a charging order against one or both of their properties. I would probably choose small claims track. Is your amount claim going to be the same amount against both defendants? What exactly was the guarantor guaranteeing? Just the rent payments or everything the tenant is responsible for too? If either of them have equity in their property then proper legal advice and representation might be worthwhile, you can claim all costs back from them and they would know how to go from here.

I believe all claims are considered "multi-track" before a specific track has been allocated by the judge. The disposal hearing will have a track allocated to it to decide on the disclosure proceedures etc before the hearing. The idea is you exchange information with each other before the hearing to try and sort it out between you, otherwise the court will make a decision based on the evidence before it on the day of the disposal hearing. In your case if the defendant has admitted everything in your claim it would be to sort out the value you should be awarded (if any). Without knowing any of the specifics of your claim I cannot guess how I would carry on with it but the first thing I would ask is: Does the defendant have any assets? (i.e. a house with equity in it) Getting an order for an amount of money and actually being able to recover it are different things.... You could end up being paid £1pw for 100 years or they could do a runner. Did the court advise you of any free arbitration service? Maybe you could put on the Allocation Questionnaire you'd be willing to use such to come to an agreement on the value owed. Check your home insurance policy if you have one, some include legal insurance and helplines. Unless the defendant has assets you might be best to come to an agreement of what they can afford to pay you over a reasonable time to stop it dragging on forever.

Did you originally file the claim for an amount "up to £xxx" rather than a specific amount? I presume you have for the court to be responding in this way. You say one defendant admitted and the other didn't respond. Did the one that admitted the claim admit to a specific amount? Did you apply for default judgment against the defendant that didn't respond? The court won't automatically enter it if you didn't and the "judgment has been made for me, for an amount to be decided by the Court" may just be against the defendant that did respond and not the one that didn't. In any case the court needs to progress your claim to work out how much you should be awarded as a judgment. You need to pursuade the court how much you deserve, quantifying it all as much as you possibly can.

I have not seen anyone else mention the Judgment from the Supreme Court on the 7th July 2010. http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/UKSC_2009_0217_Judgment.pdf For those of you defending wholly unenforceable agreements it might be worth printing out the judgment to get the Judge's attention. I know it is something we already knew but it could save you time and waffle. Let the Barrister they send argue against a recent Supreme Court Judgment! LOL See at 12: 12. The Act and the Regulations distinguish between ‘prescribed terms’ and ‘required terms’. In the case of an agreement predating 6 April 2007 such as the agreement which is the subject of this appeal, by section 127(3) of the Act a failure properly to include a prescribed term in the agreement renders the agreement wholly unenforceable, whereas a failure properly to include a required term merely means that the agreement is enforceable only by court order under section 65(1) of the Act.

I am intersted in the whole "abuse of process" thing. I have some legal education but I am not a solicitor and I don't know how things really go down. If a DCA started proceedings for say £9k then it turned out the DN was defective and they were only entitled to say £200 then surely the claim is an abuse of process? Wouldn't that cause one or more of the following? (1) No costs to claimant awarded. (2) Costs to defendant awarded. (3) Claim struck out completely as an abuse of process. If the overiding objective of the legal system is out of court settlement surely if they commence proceedings for say £9k and they only have a legal right for £200 they are denying you the opportunity to settle early? I am sure nearly everyone would settle for £200 on a £9k claim LOL!

I would stay out of court. Go through their (Eggs) complaints procedure, if you don't get a final response within say 6 weeks then start a claim with the FOS. All this is free to you, win or lose. Do a Subject Access Request so you are armed with all the data they have on you. If they hiked your interest rate recently several times before withdrawing the facilities, all this can form part of your complaint. Might get you some £££ back or save you some £££ over time. Maybe best to look to do a bal tx in the meantime? Once again, keep away from the courts!

You can do a subject access request against the credit reference agency, send them the £10 and make sure you state you are aware of the £2 statutory report they can give and you do not want this, you want all data you are entitled to under the act. You might like to add that you do not want them write back offering you the £2 one. I did one against experian once, they phoned me to say they would send a courier with it! Sure enough the next day a whole box of 2,500 pages arrived! LOL ...... be careful what you wish for! Maybe they do it on a CD these days. I am still using what they sent as scrap paper 5 years on, there is still half of the box left.

Are they chasing the money under one account reference? If so send off your £1 cheque/postal order and request a copy of the credit agreement as per s77/s78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I wouldn't mention that you know it is several combined accounts. Tell them you dispute what is owed and suggest they put the account on hold until they comply with the s77/s78 request. Take it from there!

The reconstruction needs to be a true copy, they can't just make it up. In order for it to be a true copy of the executed agreement, to be 100% sure, they'd need to have seen the original agreement. Anything less than this is hearsay evidence, if they took you to court. You'd then beat them with the CPRs to prove it is a true copy of the executed agreeement i.e. they have someone elses agreement around the same time as yours but not yours etc? Why? You'd get them to admit if they had it or not using CPR 31.14/31.15 and arrange a time to inspect the original with them. LOL You'd go for no proof it contained the prescribed terms (pre April 2007) and non-compliance of the s77/s78 request. Maybe abuse of process for bringing the claim when in non-compliance of the s77/s78 request. Drown them with legal costs, applications and the Civil Procedure Rules.

You need to start your own thread for this and then post up a copy of the agreement. To get it set aside you need to prove you have a reasonable chance of defending it too, not just that you didn't get the court papers. Hope this helps

I presume you mean 11th June and not 11th April as the cutoff date? I also presume their actions could be seen as discontinuing the claim in the previous claim. If that is the case they NEED the court's permission to make another claim. If they don't have such permission they cannot make the claim! You might want to go with this CPR as your first hit of the ball: (Say abuse of process over and over!) Discontinuance and subsequent proceedings CPR 38.7 A claimant who discontinues a claim needs the permission of the court to make another claim against the same defendant if – (a) he discontinued the claim after the defendant filed a defence; and (b) the other claim arises out of facts which are the same or substantially the same as those relating to the discontinued claim.

I have experienced in just the last few months: Filed Part 8 Claim, returned from court told to file as Part 7 Claim, done it again and sent it, received back told should have done it as a Part 8 Claim. Sent Part 8 Claim again, comes back file as Part 7 Claim. In the end I went in and showed them the tennis game we were playing. Accepted it as a Part 7 Claim then first thing judge said "why didn't you file it as a Part 8 Claim?". Another occasion, court accepting the filing of defences to an email address nobody at the court checks but this is somehow not their fault. After 6 months back to stage one as they accepted the defence as filed when they found it. Consumer Credit Act Unfair Relationship Claim issued wrong. Refusal to accept a pre-action disclosure application as it doesn't have a claim number. Filed consent orders and checked with listing clerk that the hearing had been delisted. Confirms it has. Hearing goes ahead anyway with Judge angry nobody showed up. (Happened twice in 1 month - 2 seperate claims) My personal favourite: Received a letter franked with the value of £34.00 instead of 34p. I wonder how long that went on for? I could go on and on... Oh yes, another thing, 50% of the time the Judge wont have the file at the hearing and will have no idea what it is about. Nobody knows where the file has gone. So make sure you take extra copies of everything and are prepared to explain everything.

Response received on this! The statements were sent out due to a "technical error" and all the interest they added was a "misprint"! They say they are taking steps so that it doesn't happen again and shortly all customers who received one of these statements will receive a correct statement and a covering letter. Hope this helps.

I suppose each case would have to be on it's own merits. If you have tried simply asking for it, a s77/s78 request and a DPA Subject Access request and still not got it. Then after a 31.16 request to them and giving them plenty of time to find it, they still won't come up with it and/or refuse to say if it exists or not, then I don't see how they can claim to be reasonable. The whole civil procedure rules are about settling and saving expense/the courts time. You need look no further than CPR 1.1 The overriding objective 1.1 (1) These Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly. (2) Dealing with a case justly includes, so far as is practicable – (a) ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing; (b) saving expense; © dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate – (i) to the amount of money involved; (ii) to the importance of the case; (iii) to the complexity of the issues; and (iv) to the financial position of each party; (d) ensuring that it is dealt with expeditiously and fairly; and (e) allotting to it an appropriate share of the court’s resources, while taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases. It would be truly absurd if they allowed the appeal in anyway.

There are many Smiths, Browns and Joneses born on the same day with the same first name. Probably a dozen of them every day at least. Then there are the ones who marry a Smith, Brown or Jones too... Not really that much of a coincidence.

You will need to gather some information before you decide how to proceed. I would start by reading this thread. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/241827-legal-action-how-start.html Basically, you need to tell the court you will be defending it all, that way you get 28 days to decide what to do. As they have mentioned the Credit Agreement in their claim send a letter off by Special Delivery requesting a copy of the Agreement as per CPR 31.14. If they haven't complied with your s77/s78 request you might also have a defence of "abuse of process" as the agreement is unenforceable until they have properly complied. I believe someone recently won on this point.

Make sure you report them to the OFT, they could be committing an offence as per the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It is an offence under the above to mislead a consumer. I have seen collection action stop and debts being written off when the regulator gets invovled. You may think it is a waste of time and they don't do anything but it sure is worth the price of a stamp! Misleading actions 5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3). (2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph— (a) if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and (b) it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. (4) The matters referred to in paragraph (2)(a) are—(j) the nature, attributes and rights of the trader (as defined in paragraph 6); (k) the consumer’s rights or the risks he may face.

A friend has also got one of these letters this week and it is virtually the same as yours. The data in it doesn't match any of the data that was obtained just 3 months earlier from Masterloan/Barclays in a Subject Access Request, which makes me feel the letter is an error. Or some shadow accounting system they are operating... very very dodgy!! Statement dated 1st Oct 2008 to 21 Jan 2010. A whopping £5k+ interest added in Oct 2008 then interest added each month. The balance increasing and showing as 17k closing in Jan 2010. Annual Interest rate at 0.00%. A subject access was done against masterloan/all of barclays in September 2009 and none of this shows at all anywhere! Infact they show the payments being received via the DCA and the balance being 10k. Also a Subject Access done against the DCA at the same time matches everything with Barclays data, balance as 10k. I also note on this Masterloan statement they have deleted any trace of the PPI! They have added the PPI amount to the Cash Loan amount and described it all as a Cash Loan plus where PPI shows they show N/A!!! Having got a copy of the original application/agreement they are caught out! Trying to hide it eh? Other data released in the Subject Access against masterloan show that this account was transferred to their "New Customer Interface" in October 2008. The printout of that shows the balance as 10k too, even up to Sept 2009. No sign of the 5k interest or any other interest being added. Wasn't it October 2008 that the banks were getting very desperate to stay solvent? Hmmmm, I would never accuse them of cooking the books!

Some DCAs are still quoting Rankine as a reason they do not have to comply with a s78 request on an account that has defaulted/been terminated (with a balance). I found this from the January 2010 OFT Guidance:- "In Rankine –v- American Express Services Europe Ltd [2008] GCCR 7701 it was held that the prohibition on enforcement in section 78(6) did not apply to an agreement that 'was at an end'. However the finding was obiter as the Judge held there had been compliance with the section in any event. The question whether the duty to provide copies and statements where the agreement has been terminated but under which monies nevertheless are, will or may be payable was not an issue in that case." I suppose the debtor could also "reconstruct" a s78 request they made to the original creditor (if it is with a DCA) prior to it being terminated... It would be helpful if the position was fully clarified though in court.

How many creditors do you think will comply with the last paragraph in 5.6? LOL! "Thirdly, the creditor or owner should make it clear in communications to the debtor that the debt is in fact unenforceable. Failure to do so, where the creditor or owner is aware of unenforceability, would in our view unfairly mislead the debtor by omission." I bet they choked on their biscuit at that one!