Jump to content

Micky the Hippo

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    858
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Micky the Hippo

  1. Particulars of Claim for reference only ..do not submit with defence

     

    1.The Claim is for the sum owing of £ 5xxx in respect of monies owing under an Agreement with the account no.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

     

    2.The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank plc (EX BARCLAYCARD) to the claimant and notice has been served.

     

    3.The Defendant has failed to make any contractual payments under the terms of the Agreement. A default notice has been served upon the Defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA.

     

    The Claimant claims

    1. The said sum of £ 5xxx

    2. Costs

     

    Defence

     

    1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

     

    2.The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.


    3. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.

     

    4. Paragraph 2 is denied .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

     

    5.Paragraph 3  is denied.I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .

     

    6. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.

     

    7. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 17/07/2019.Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 17/07/2019.

     To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .

     

    8.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to

     

    a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement;

    b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for;

    c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974.

    d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

     

    9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

     

    10. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974.6.

     

    By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

  2. Hello and yes indeed to getting on with it, here I am, reading a few other threads. So I can upload the below through MCOL ... I've lifted it from here Hoist claimform - Aqua Card debt***Claim Discontinued***

     

    Is point 3 ok? Is there any need to admit to past dealings?

     

    As always, thanks for all and any help and advice

    Micky

     

     

    Particulars of Claim

     

    1.The claim is for the sum of £xxx in respect of monies owing under and agreement with the account 12345678 pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974 (CCA)

     

    2.The debt was legally assigned by Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 Ltd to the claimant and notice has been served.

     

    3.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement. A default notice has been served upon the Defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA

     

    The claimant claims

    1.     The sum of £xxx

     

    Defence

     

    1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

     

    2.The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.


    3. The Claimants case is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.

     

    4. Furthermore  I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

     

    5. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.

     

    6. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 17/07/2019.

     

    Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 17/07/2019.

     

    To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .

     

    7.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to

     

    a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement;

    b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for;

    c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974.

    d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

     

    8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

     

    9. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974.6.

     

    By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

  3. Apologies for the lack of updates, started a new job involving 30 miles of cycling each day so slightly weary in the evenings.

     

    I got the seemingly routine letter from Cohen  a week and a bit ago about looking for requested documents and delaying everything for 14 days, attached.

     

    The original claim form was dated 12 Jul, am I right to think I need to send in a defence via MCOL within 28 days of that date, along the lines that I have not been send a valid CCA at any time and indeed no CCA of any kind from Hoist/Cohen? It's a fialry template defence?

    HC.pdf

  4. Hi,sorry for delay in respnse, just started a new job.

     

    LBA here

     

    Sports Direct

    1st June 2019

     

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    On 26th January 2019 I bought a pair of Phantom VSN in size 11 from Sports Direct Chingford.

    Please see my details of purchase below.

    ..... screen grab from bank statement of card payment ....

    On the 27th June 2019 I was surprised to see that the sole of the right boot had torn open at one of the rear studs, making the boots unusable. Please see picture below.

    ..... picture of torn sole of boot ....

    The Consumer Rights Act makes it an implied term of the contract that goods be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality.  I do not feel that an £85 pair of boots should fail after five months of being used for nothing other than their intended purpose.

    As you are in breach of contract I am rejecting the boots and request that you refund the sum paid to you of approximately £85 which I trust you will be able confirm from your records. I have bought a replacement pair of the same boots from your website on the 28th June 2019 as my son needed boots almost immediately, for that reason please give me a full refund of the original purchase price.

    I am today returning the faulty boots along with this letter to the Chingford branch of your store.

    If I do not receive your satisfactory proposals for settlement of my claim within 7 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue a claim against you in the county court without further reference to you.

    Yours faithfully,

     

    They replied by email to say this

    .............

    Thank you for send your football boots for a further inspection.

     

    I would like to advise you that on inspection it is our belief that the issue is due to wear and tear and not an inherent manufacturing fault. I appears that the stud had been caught on something which has caused it to rip apart from the sole.

     

    Sadly, I am afraid for this reason we are on this occasion unable to offer a replacement or refund for your boots.

     

    I have now returned your boots to you.

     

    Apologies for any disappointment caused.

    Kind regards,

    ................

    The boots arrived back to me today

     

    I assume I now make a small claims claim?

     

    Thanks

    Micky

     

  5. Hello everyone

     

    I bought son one a pair of football boots in Sport Direct in late Jan this year, the only ones that fit his rather odd feet were £85, so far so good.

     

    After five months one of the moulded studs ripped away from the sole leaving the boots useless.

     

    I've bought him boots every year, astro and grass for the last ten years and every single pair lasted a season until he grew out of them, in this case the sole of the boots simply tore under normal use on astroturf and for the money I paid it seems to me that the sole was not strong enough for the purpose, ie unfit.

     

    The store I bought them in refused to deal with me but their head office said send them in and have just replied after a couple of weeks to say that their opinion was that it was due to wear and tear and not a manufacturing fault.

     

    I said that was not acceptable to me and they had failed in the exact purpose for which they been made and bought for and I would pursue this legally. £85 for me is too much for something to fail after 5 months or normal use.

     

    Never ever pursued anything like this before, I wrote a LBA which went with the boots to them, they are going to return the boots, what do I do now, start a claim in Small Claims?

     

    Any and all advice appreciated inc a link to a suitable thread.

     

    many thanks

    Micky

  6. hello all

     

    Claimant - Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LI

     

    Date of issue – 12 July 2019

     

    What is the claim for –

     

    The Claim is for the sum owing of £ 5xxx in respect of monies owing under an Agreement with the account no.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

     

     The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank plc (EX BARCLAYCARD) to the claimant and notice has been served. The Defendant has failed to make any contractual payments under the terms of the Agreement. A default notice has been served upon the Defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA.

     

    The Claimant claims

    1. The said sum of £ 5xxx

    2. Costs

     

    Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol)? I don't think so

     

    What is the value of the claim? £5xxx

     

    Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit card

     

    When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? June  2007

     

    Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser

     

    Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I think so

     

    Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Unsure

     

    Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? I think so

     

    Why did you cease payments? Upon not being sent a CCA following a request

     

    What was the date of your last payment? Early 2016

     

    Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes in that no acceptable CCA was ever sent

     

    Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? in 2014/2015

    ........

     

    hello every one again,

    this account relates to a SKY card applied for online 2007,

     

    along with all my other credit cards I sent off SARS etc in 2016 with routine success in that valid CCAs were not sent and I ignored all correspondence thereafter.

     

     

    This week I got a claim from got HOIST FINANCE using Howard Cohen as the address. 

     

    After skimming a few other threads it appears to be a case of responding online to the claim form stating an intention to defend the claim, send a CCA request to the claimant, Hoist and a CPR to the solicitors, Cohen?

     

    And it's likely a case of following procedure until the discontinue?

     

    As ever, thanks for all advice and support

     

    I have acknowledged the claim online 

     

    CCA and CPR are written and I'll post them tomorrow,

     

    if the POC on the claim letter do not mention any documents beyond a reference to a default notice being served and an agreement, is that all I ask them to provide or should I leave the whole default list in?

     

    Thanks

    Micky

  7. Hello all

     

    I banged off a ppi enquiry to every single company that I had ever borrowed from, in case, although I'm fairly sure I always declined any extra services.

     

    Egg/One Canada Square replied last to say that I did have ppi on a very old credit card back in the day. I complained and today got a letter saying that my complaint was upheld but there was nothing to refund as no premiums were ever applied, something like that.

     

    Does that sound sensible/likely? If I dig out some old statements will it show on them as a separate line?

     

    SAR?

     

    Thanks

    Micky

  8. That's good advice, thank-you

     

    Sorry about me, off work with a crocked knee and got a bit daytime tv la la

     

    They're local so will help the daughter with the letter first thing and she can politely hand it to them tomorrow

     

    Will update with progress

     

    Micky

     

    oh and it's an 18 month old iphone 6 in good order barring it wanting a £25 repair, the daughter will research it value tomorrow morning

  9. Hello, i suspect this is fairly straightforward but google is unhelpful

     

    My daughter took a damaged Iphone 7 to the local repair shop that have done loads of good repairs for us and friends.

     

    They've said they've been burgled and her phone amongst other is stolen, their initial response to her is to try and track it down online

     

    I assume i right that they have to replace it with a like for like? If they are reluctant what is the best way to go? Legal or otherwise? I'd like to quote the relevant law or legal recourse to show them I mean business.

     

    And how long is reasonable to wait for them to replace the phone? She genuinely does reply on it.

     

    Thanks

    Micky

×
×
  • Create New...