Jump to content

andyb78

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About andyb78

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Shoos have written. I'll send a CCA to Arrow and advise Shoos that I have done so. Thanks a lot for your help.
  2. In post #49, you advised me to CCA Shoos, which I did back then. Also CCA'd Arrow at the same time. Sent the long letter above to Shoo's too, but have never received a response to any of the three communications.
  3. It may well be, but it was supplied by one of your colleagues on here who was trying to help and be constructive! And since I did not receive any correspondence up until now, I guess that it had some kind of effect three years ago? So, to recap and be clear, your advice is to ignore the people that have written to me, but reply to the DCA whom I haven't heard from with a CCA request again?
  4. Dear Sirs, Reference: 123456789 Thank you for your letter of the xx/xx/xxxx, which for the avoidance of doubt is being treated as a formal letter before actionicon. I refer you to the Practice Direction-Pre-Action Conduct (“PD-PAC”). In particular I refer you to paragraph 1 of PD-PAC which states that its purpose is to “enable the parties to settle the issues between them” and to encourage the parties to “exchange information”. Compliance with the PD-PAC will mean that proceedings will be avoided if possible and cases that proceed to trial are dealt with efficiently. The court will take into account failure to comply with PD-PAC. I put you on notice that I have asked for copy documents and that you have failed to send copies of them to me. If proceedings are issued I will therefore inform the court of this and ask that sanctions are imposed for this failure and in this regard I refer you to paragraph 4.4 (4) PD-PAC which lists as an example of non-compliance with PD-PAC a circumstance where a party has - “without good reason, not disclosed documents requested to be disclosed”. Paragraph 2.2 (1) of Annex A of the PD-PAC places on you an obligation to “list the essential documents on which the Claimant intends to rely” in your letter of claimicon. I could not identify any such list in your letter of claim. Please list your documents so that I can see the case against me and request copies of anything that I need to assist me in narrowing the issues in this matter. You will note that paragraph 3.2 (3) of Annex A of the PD-PAC permits me to “request further information to enable (me) to provide a full response”. In this instance that request is in the form of a request for documents as the information that I seek is within those documents. Paragraph 5.1 of Annex A states that you should “provide the documents requested by the defendant within as short a period of time as is practicable or explain in writing why the documents will not be provided”. For the avoidance of doubt the documents that I require to be sent to me are as follows: 1. A copy of the original credit agreement; 2. A copy of the Default Notice; 3. A copy of the Termination Notice; 4. A copy of the Notice of Assignment; 5. Copies of statements; 6. Copies of any communication between yourselves and the creditor. The documents listed above are all ones that I would expect to be disclosed during the course of proceedings and which would likely be in your possession when drafting a claim in any event so their production to me should not cause any difficulty to you. If you do consider that there is difficulty in providing a copy of a document please identify that document and the reason for its non disclosure at this stage. You will no doubt be aware that in addition to the PD-PAC requirements there is an additional responsibility to supply documents which is imposed by the consumer crediticon Act 1974 (“CCA 1974”). A request was made under s.77 / s.78 / s.79 on the xx/xx/xxxx and this has not been complied with. The agreement is therefore rendered unenforceable whilst that failure to comply remains outstanding. To issue proceedings in such circumstances would be premature and would be met by an application by me to strike out the claim as having no prospect of success. Upon receipt of the documents requested and your reply to the above I will respond with the grounds for my defence so that the issues can be identified. I am willing to consider ADR upon receipt of full disclosure of documents. I cannot consider it before then as I will not have the full information before me. Failure to provide full disclosure may therefore result in an opportunity for ADR to be missed. You will no doubt be aware of paragraph 9.7 of PD-PAC. It is my view that you will be unable to state that there has been the required compliance in the absence of full “cards on the table” disclosure of documents before proceedings have been issued. I anticipate being able to provide you with a full response to your aforementioned letter within 14 days of receipt of the documents listed above and also reserve the right to refer to the contents of this letter if proceedings are issued without first providing copy documents to me. Yours faithfully, Sorry, not CCA request. This is the original letter I sent to Shoos years back, the CCA went to the DCA at the same time. Did not get a response from either in terms of proving the debt.
  5. I will send the aforementioned letter with my new address included. Can I refer to the previous letter I sent, which was essentially 'I have no knowledge of the debt', with a CCA request included, or should I start a fresh? Should I CCA the DCA as well as Shoos again too?
  6. I haven't heard from any other DCA's since I moved, only these guys. I was always under the impression that they pull the data from your credit file anyway. I have drafted a letter that basically outlines the previous CCA requests that have not been met. I was then going to include the old CCA's in the envelope with the letter.
  7. Should add that the letters are getting to me via Royal Mail forwarding service, as I moved approx two years ago.
  8. Received the same letter today, advising that the 50% discount date is approaching. I forgot to mention in earlier post that there is a paragraph at the bottom of the letter stating that 'after revving my credit file, they will refer my account to their client for Warrant of Control. Basically, I will be sent a letter by an enforcement agent and within 15 days some chap will turn up on my doorstep to asses what can be sold to meet the debt. This is a step I most certainly do not want to happen. I have a very young family, last thing I need is my wife being harassed when I'm at work.
  9. Okay, thanks DX. It's always tempting to remind them of their obligations, as have found that silence sometimes makes them think of weakness.
  10. Sorry, my error, maths is terrible! Lol Ignoring the statute bit for another few months, how should I proceed? Big bold writing tempting 50% offer, then smaller text paragraph at the bottom stating that Arrow MAY proceed to a CCJ. They gave me 6 weeks to reply too, which is nice!
  11. Resurrecting an old thread here! Received another letter from Shoos as before, stating court action if I don't agree to a reduced full and final settlement. Shall I just send a letter with copies of the letters I sent back in 2015 to Arrow and Shoos stating that I do not know of the debt and do not acknowledge it. I asked for CCA's from both before and nothing materialised. Should add, I stopped paying all of my creditors back in May 2013, so technically, that should make this statute barred now by three months. If I go statute barred route, is that putting my hands up to it?
  12. That's a good point actually. I will wait out the 30 days and see what comes next. I'll update as and when I hear more. Thanks all again for your help, always appreciated and your time.
  13. Please don't think I was being standoffish, was not the intention, I just want to be careful as such. Getting close to statute on a couple of bits, last thing I want to do is stir the hornets nest. So best ignore, rather than highlight the error? I'm assuming that it's an intentional error as such, hoping that I wouldn't notice.
×
×
  • Create New...