Jump to content

focus594

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by focus594

  1. Even if you aren't allowed to take holidays from September to December you are still entitled to full entitlement for the year, which is 5.6 weeks including bank holidays.
  2. Sorry DX just noticed this reply when looking at a little used email account, clicked on it to find a second page! August 2009, Bryan Carter did send a summary of payments to him as part of the set aside submission, which showed 7 payments made from Sept that year. Then a default notice fee, some further interest then a transfer to balance fee, whatever that is. Ive got everything that BC and Lowell sent him scanned on my computer.
  3. It wasn't from a site it was something that I composed for him. That was only part of it but the last 2 points were from something I saw on here. I have appended the other two points to the bottom of this post if its any help but it would appear that I've approached it from the wrong angle. I was under the impression that it was up to the DCA to prove absolute assignment which they haven't. He's still waiting for the CCA from DCA but they still have another day or two yet. I fear its of little value because there is no dispute there is a CCA, which I assume the original creditor will have. Presumably a fresh set aside application would have to be made to defend it from a CCA pov? ---------------------------------------- 6. The claimant has issued proceedings pursuant to the Law of Properties Act 1925. For the assignment of a debt to be effective and so giving the Claimant a right of action a valid Notice of Assignment must have been sufficiently served on me using a registered postal service pursuant to s196(4) before proceedings were commenced. The Claimant is put to strict proof that any notice of assignment was sufficiently served on me before proceedings were commenced. Without this proof, the Claimant has no right of action. 7. Further, it is submitted that the mere fact of giving a notice does not, of itself, create an assignment and that there must be an actual assignment in existence. It is the actual Assignment, not just the Section 136 notice, under which the Claimant derives title to bring the claim and the Claimant is put to strict proof that such Assignment exists. It is further believed that I am entitled, in any event, to view the document of assignment as a matter of law (Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968 [3] All ER 824) --------------------------------------------------------------------
  4. That's the first time I've seen mention of a signed agreement? Are you referring to the Original Credit Agreement? A copy of this was requested from the DCA as part of the SAR and wasn't forthcoming, they said he would have to obtain any documents from the original creditor. This formed part of his comments on the set aside to the Judge, in which he said " 3. My major concern is whether [DCA] have absolute assignment over the debt. Without it they are unable to issue a county court summons as they have not taken over full rights and responsibilities of the debt. 4. On xx August 2014 I issued a Subject Access Request to [DCA] requesting full details of the account, their reply was received on xx August 2014. 5. I believe this to be proved by their reply in which they state they are unable to provide certain documents and I would need to get in touch with the original creditor to obtain them. If they had absolute assignment all this information would be in their possession. (Exhibit xx1 & xx2) --------------------------------- A further request for a copy of the CCA was sent to the DCA on 29/10/14 following your advice. Is it worth appealing dx, or not?
  5. Update. The set aside hearing has been heard and gone in the DCA favour. From what my friend has said the Judge looked at two issues. Issue 1 was the lateness of submitting the defence, and the Judge dismissed it as he had ample time to get his defence in prior to the Judgement being issued. This is accepted. Issue 2 was in respect of whether it was legal for the DCA to bring a summons in the first place. The DCA solicitors submitted their comments in writing and said for cost reasons they wouldn't be attending. In the written comments they stated they had assignment and produced two letters, one from the OR and one from the DCA. My mate tried to argue that although they had stated that they had assignment he didn't believe they had absolute assignment. In their written submission they stated they would not be providing proof of assignment as it contained commercially sensitive data. The Judge said she could see there had been an assignment on evidence of the two letters produced by the DCA. Also what did he mean by absolute assignment, which he struggled to explain. The CPR request to the solicitors also fell on deaf ears, as they said they didn't need to provide any info as it wasn't a trial hearing. So, the next stage, should he appeal? I believe he should but how would he convince the court that the DCA doesn't have absolute assignment.
  6. The defence wasn't filed because it had already been entered into Judgement the previous evening, although it would have been that the dca was not the original creditor and therefore had no legal authority to issue a summons. The set aside application was done the next day. He is going to request the various stuff from the solicitors and the CCA from the claimant as you've advised. Should the defence also be included via a further witness statement to the court (previous witness statement attached) and copy sent to solicitor?
  7. The DCA claims to have had the debt assigned to them. That being the case they should hold all the details of the account as if they were the original creditor. Of course, if they haven't had the debt absolutely assigned they have no authority to issue court proceedings, as far as I understand. Regards John
  8. My friend was issued with a summons which he wished to defend because he believes the DCA has no authority to pursue, and this was going to be the mainstay of his defence. He acknowledged service, asked for 14 extra days and sent SAR to DCA. DCA claim debt has been assigned to them by OC. DCA replied to SAR and stated that they couldn't provide breakdown of account, interest etc or provide CCA because it was with original creditor, and he would need to write to them. He was late filing defence when he went to do it there was an error at moneyclaim online. They acknowledged error and said give it 24 hours then log back in. Logged back in day after and it said judgement had been entered the previous evening. He's applied to have judgement set aside on both grounds of error on website and his belief that DCA dont have the authority to enforce judgement. Set aside has been acknowledged and hearing is in two weeks. What does he need to do now, if anything.
  9. There was an agreement to pay £30 a month with the solicitors but not through the court. It is unlikely that many payments were made.
  10. This in relation to another thread I have but just running an idea through my head. Say someone is issued a judgement and later a charging order. 5 years later they discover that the claimant had no right to issue the summons because the debt wasn't legally assigned to them. Obviously the judgement can't be set aside but in theory could the defendant point this out to the claimant with a demand for payment equal to the judgement, which if not satisfied ie by clearing the debt/charging order, the defendant then issues a new summons for the same, on the grounds of fraud by the claimant (letter issued saying debt had been legally assigned when it hadn't been) Am I right in believing that the OC must notify the debtor in writing for a legal assignment to be valid? Also would the original CCA have been passed on to the buyer of the debt at the same time?
  11. Judging by steampowered comments in post 11 getting the judgement set aside after 4 or 5 years would be highly unlikely, mores the pity. I was aware of the charging order myth having looked into it a few years ago on behalf of one of my mates after he was hit for a 67k co (sole debt joint mortgage) and I showed him that thread at the time. Much as I would personally call their bluff, it isn't my house at stake. Her deceased partner is still on the mortgage/deeds so would she be still only be liable for her interest in the property or the whole now she has inherited his share? I think theres a small argument that it wouldn't leave enough money left over to rehouse herself if they were to take their share. Personally I would simply call their bluff but it isn't my house at stake. A variation order is looking the best option.
  12. No, I can't say she has. At the time of the Lowell CCJ's she went through a very stressful time at work, and took 2-3 weeks off sick through stress not long after. I think that was the reason Lowell got completely ignored.
  13. OR is Lombard Tricity, and to filrobbo about £150 in charges. Shame about querying the legal assignment because she has just received a couple of lowell letters for two credit card debts that were CCJ'd by them in 2011. I know for a fact they wont have been legally assigned. Unfortunately she didn't contest them (has stuck her head in the sand big style over the last few years) and when I found out about them they had already been ccj'd, and she didn't have the £150 needed to set them aside. I guess they will also go down the charging order route. I was going to suggest to her waiting for them to go back to court then contesting the original ccj's.
  14. Yes indeed, I remember seeing them both. Should an original creditor be allowed to pass on telephone contact details to a dca when a letter has been sent to original creditor forbidding telephone contact?
  15. You may remember I said upthread that I was dubious that this was a legally assigned debt? Heres the reasons for my suspicions My friend received a county court summons in 2008 from the solicitors for the new creditor. There was no mention of the original creditor and my friend wrote to the solicitor requesting info, which they supplied. It contained a letter dated 2007 from the solicitor saying the new creditor had now taken over the debt as agreed with he original creditor and it was now legally assigned to them, and a fax of the original agreement. Also on the same fax was a breakdown of payments and fees charged (late payments etc) and the final note says 2007 Transferred to Solicitors. This I strongly suspect has come from the original creditor. That fax was dated at the same time my friend requested the info in 2008. Would it be worth sending a SAR to get the proof that it has been legally assigned and, if so, is it best to send it to the original creditor or to the solicitor of the new creditor.
  16. Both herself and her partner are on the deeds and the mortgage. He died a few years ago (after this debt) but she has never done anything about taking his name off because, due to his age, couldn't be insured, so there was no question of the mortgage being cleared following his death. The mortgage is up to date from what she says, it has another 17 years to run.
  17. What a disgusting state of affairs. My opinion of Lowell was already low before reading this thread. It beggars belief that a company, supposedly governed by OFT, can behave in such a despicable way. I hope you get every penny you sue them for Foggy.
  18. Large sum is owed to Argos and a letter was sent to them saying no further telephone contact. They have now passed the debt to Fredricksons who are phoning day and night on both landline and mobile. Letter will be sent to Fredricksons but I am just wondering. If Argos have a letter warning of telephone harrassment should they have passed on telephone contact details to Fredricksons? What happens if Fredrickson then pass the debt to someone else, would the calls start all over again. Also Fredricksons have already been sent an harrasment letter regarding another creditor, would this just apply to that creditor or would it apply to Fredricksons making telephone contact full stop.
  19. A friend of mine got a final charging order for £3000 in 2008. Nothing has been paid off the debt since then (lots of debts, small income) and she heard nothing from the company in the meantime so it was forgotten. Company solicitors have now sent a letter saying they are looking to force a sale since nothing has been paid. Two concerns: The debt was allegedly legally assigned from a well known finance company to an offshore debt collector. I remember at the time asking my friend to get proof of the debt and legal assignment as the first she knew about it was when the new company issued a court order in 2008. I asked my friend at the time to get proof of the debt and whether it has been legally assigned, which apparently they did, but my friend never informed me so it went to court and the charging order was put in place. I have now seen that legal assignment but it is just a letter from the solicitors of the new company saying the debt has been legally assigned to them. There is nothing to confirm this from the original creditor. Call me a cynic but I don't believe them. I'm considering asking my friend tyo send off for a SAR, would that contain paperwork confirming that a legal assignment has taken place, or otherwise as the case may be. (from the original creditor)? The credit agreement was taken out in 2004 Secondly, if they were to push for a final sale, how likely is it that it would happen. There is, at most, 5k equity in the house, her youngest child is 18. The amount owed is approx 7% of the value of the house. Her situation is such that she is unable to repay the debt in an acceptable timescale.
×
×
  • Create New...