Jump to content

BFV

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About BFV

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

53 profile views
  1. Final letter from Intrum Intrum Acc Closed Redacted.pdf
  2. Claim dismissed and Claimant to pay Defendant's costs etc Don't think I ever stated "won' - they failed, judge found in my favour etc....
  3. Third letter arrived today with a bit more info, saying they are aware IND initiated legal action. They didn't say that they are aware that IND lost the claim! I have reminded them.... Intrum 3 Redacted.pdf
  4. Here are the two letters so far received. #1 is an introduction saying that IND has been "acquired" by Intrum - whatever that means. Then there is the legal stuff about data etc. Also a page on IND. It appears they are trying to keep the two entities separate, probably to avoid further complaints to OFT and FCA about IND, and being associated with them. #2 is dated just 6 working days later, and is more aggressive - stamped from the Legal Department and signed "Lily Chan, General Counsel". I have not checked but suspect she is fictitious. Whilst they are only requesting contact at this point, it is clearly meant to intimidate - all fuel for later reports to OFT. Intrum 1 Redacted.pdf Intrum 2 Redacted.pdf
  5. Will do and thanks a million. I'll update if I hear anything back from them.
  6. I was thinking a letter along these lines - Dear Intrum aka 1st Credit Your reference ….. WITHOUT PREJUDICE (is this the correct term?) You have contacted me about the account with the above reference number. I do not admit any liability for your claim. Enclosed is the Court’s Decision following IND’s attempt to enforce judgment along with the order for costs in my favour. Additionally the alleged debt is Statute Barred. Under the Limitation Act 1980 "...a firm must not attempt to recover a statute barred debt in England, Wales or Northern Ireland if the lender or owner has not been in contact with the customer during the limitation period." 7.15.4 "A firm must not continue to demand payment from a customer after the customer has stated that he will not be paying the debt because it is statute barred." 7.15.8 Do not make any further contact about the above claim or I will lodge another complaint against your organisations with the FCA. Yours (typed)
  7. Hi Dx,and thanks, Andyorch advised me before on the claim, he was brilliant. I ended up getting a barrister to represent me in court and it worked. I have tried to search for similar threads, maybe you can recommend a couple for me to check? I never paid anything, always disputed it. The original claim was lodged with Northampton Bulk Clearing in 2011 but they never replied to my defence and it was stayed. They then reactivated it in 2016, it went to Court and the judge found in my favour. I understand that the debt is still there, but is it now statute barred as the original claim was 2011? I never admitted the debt, though in defending the claim I guess I did have correspondence with IND. I will defo send them a copy of the judgement, along with the order for costs. How about a statute barred letter too?
  8. I had IND chase me for a very old debt which was resolved in the courts in 2016, in my favour! Judgement for me for several reasons, they initially started an Appeal but withdrew it before hearing. I got all costs (Barrister etc) Now Intrum have sent letters saying they have taken over from IND and I can tell they are heading either for a CCJ or SD. I feel I should direct them to the Court's Judgement - any suggestions? Many thanks
  9. UPDATE! I submitted my defence in October 2011, and have the acknowledgement from the court that it was received. IND failed to respond and the claim as Stayed. However, the Stay was lifted in June this year, some 5 years later. I was told by the Court in a phone call that the Stay had been lifted in order for the legal representative to be removed from the case. But the case has become "Live" once again and the Courts have set a date of 23rd Novemeber to hear the claim. I'd appreciate some advice... IND did not respond to my defence, they did not respond to my s.78 request, they did not respond to a CPR 18. The claim itself claims interest from 4/8/09 - I'm assuming this is when they claim the assignment occured - but this date is out of statute. I was also informed by the Court that they have a record of receiving my defence, but the document has gone missing.... I am minded to go to Court and get the claim struck, but could use some advice on the best way to achieve this.
  10. Update on my case - The 28 days for IND to respond to my defence has passed. I did try calling Northampton Bulk Centre to check that it has been stayed but I was 23rd in the queue to be answered....am guessing that is something to do with the number of claims being issued by IND. I'll give it another go next week. Have had no repsonse from IND re. my S78 and CPR18 requests to them, apart from an initial letter acknowledging receipt.
  11. Well done Shammie, congratulations. This goes to prove how unprofessional IND are - that they are using the Courts in order to frighten people in to paying them. Andy, do you think it would be worth me including this in my defence, or saving it for the judge if it goes that far?
  12. Thanks again Andy, I have removed 3, it is adequately covered in the rest of the defence anyway, and added "unless the claimant can disclose and prove then the matter should be struck out." under 8 IND still have a week to respond to my CPR18 and S78 requests, so I will wait till then before filing the defence just in case they come up with anything. However, I am certain they won't. DEFENCE.doc
  13. Thanks Andy, My intention is to just submit a defence, and bring this in front of a judge. To call their bluff as it were. I am a bit concerned that you say the claimant does not have to provide any original agreement - surely they will need something to prove the debt?
  14. Thanks jdes - here's my first attempt.... bearing in mind the claimant's very vague details in POC. What do you think? DEFENCE.doc
×
×
  • Create New...