NR/Wallers Claimform - £29k Pers Loan *DISCONTINUED*

[womble72]

Thanks Ben,i will give it a try.

[Curlyben]

Paul just slapped me to say stick post it notes over your personal details so to keep anonymity.

[womble72]

Hi Ben/Paul,

 

I did try on adobe but could not find the advance tool.

Also my mouse packed up on me last night, so i will give it another go when i get home.

If i try to scan 3 documents minus my name,etc i will try to upload them on photobucket for you to check.

These letters are a default, formal, and my orginal contract.

If you think that could help me with my defence i.e wording could be wrong.

I will give it a try later when i get home.

 

Regards

 

Womble

[pt2537]

Hi Womble

 

 

it would give us an idea of what(if anything) they are possibly going to produce . we can also see if what you have is compliant with the law

 

it would give us a head start for sure

 

regards

paul

[womble72]

Thanks Paul.

[womble72]

Good Evening Everbody,

 

Well i took you guys advice and used posted notes.

 

The information is of the following,

 

Contract (front and back page)

 

Two letters- default and formal

 

Lastly- The court papers.

 

happy reading and let me know if it can help my defense.

 

P.s This is the paperwork i took to the cab.

 

Here are the links

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd235/womble1988/img008.jpg

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd235/womble1988/img007.jpg

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd235/womble1988/img006.jpg

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd235/womble1988/img003.jpg

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd235/womble1988/img002.jpg

 

Yet again many thanks for your help

 

Womble

[womble72]

Hi Paul.

 

Hope i have done the links correctly.

 

Womble

[Curlyben]

Thanks for that Womble, they're great.

[womble72]

Cheers Paul.

[pt2537]

yes thanks womble

 

can you remember when the default notice was delivered?

 

also i assume the clause refered to in the Default( Clause 4) is the ones on the other link?

 

am i right?

[womble72]

O.k the default letter was for the 8th September.

The other letter was dated 4th October (formal demand)

 

Womble

[womble72]

Clause 4 is based on the formal demand.(that's just a guess)

[womble72]

Is the letter an actual default letter?

[womble72]

Thanks Ben for your feedback

[pt2537]

Hi Womble,

 

i am mulling over hte Default, i have a issue with it

 

it says "in accordance with clause 4 of your agreement"

 

well looking at image no 3, i am assuming they are your conditions which the default is refering to

 

this is what i need to clarify

 

Regards

paul

[womble72]

Ok image 3 is the back page of the orginal contract linked with image 2

[pt2537]

right ok,

 

well, the agreement looks ok so we will ask someone to run the figures and see if they are ok.

 

the particulars of claim States 7 days for the default of 1130.49 yet the default notice states 14 days for 862.97 which is a bit of a cock up on their part.

 

we dont know what they are going to come up with document wise so lets not worry too much just yet

 

at least we know what they may have

[womble72]

Many Thanks

 

Speak tm.

 

Need my sleep.

 

Womble

[tomterm8]

the figures don't match between the default notice and particulars of claim.

 

I would definatly like to see their break down in terms of charges etc.

 

the bad news is, notwithstanding the maths (which someone else should do... I am terrible with maths), the credit agreement you have seems enforceable to me. Not entirely properly executed, but enforceable.

 

What were your circumstances leading up to the court case?

 

(EDIT: Pauls point is valid, however, I am not convinced that it would really help you. Even if the default notice were incorrect, AFAIK, all they would have to do is discontinue the case, issue a new default notice, and start the case again. )

[pt2537]

Hi Tom

 

 

i looked at clause 4 referred to in the Default notice and it does not appear to be the clause relating to payments if you look at the terms and conditions

 

this i dont think complies with Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices)

Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) i may be wrong but s3 states

 

3

A specification of:--

(a) the provision of the agreement alleged to have been breached; and

(b) the nature of the alleged breach of the agreement, specifying clearly the matters complained of; and either

© if the breach is capable of remedy, what action is required to remedy it and the date, being a date [not less than

fourteen days] after the date of service of the notice, before which that action is to be taken; or

(d) if the breach is not capable of remedy, the sum (if any) required to be paid as compensation for the breach and

the date, being a date [not less than fourteen days] after the date of service of the notice, before which it is to be paid.

 

would this not be relevent?

 

 

regards

paul

[tomterm8]

Hi Tom

 

....

 

would this not be relevent?

 

 

regards

paul

 

Hi paul,

 

as i said, it is a valid point, but ultimatly even if the default is invalid, the claimant would be able to discontinue the action, issue a new default, and then continue the action.

 

this is the same as errors with a notice of assignment.

[pt2537]

also the copy that womble has posted is his copy Tom no the copy that they have sent him,

 

i wasnt sure if you were aware of this

[tomterm8]

also the copy that womble has posted is his copy Tom no the copy that they have sent him,

 

i wasnt sure if you were aware of this

 

Well, they will probabliy send him exactly the same default notice... After all, they only sent it a month ago, even they can't be that daft:)

 

if they are different, that's a problem for the judge. My deepest concern is the fact they simply don't appear to know how much the OP actually owes. there are discrepancies all over the show.

[pt2537]

hi tom,

 

yeah but it is also the credit agreement which was wombles own copy, so if they have lost it or mislaid it then they are up the creek without a paddle

 

thats what i was looking at

 

regards

paul

[womble72]

Evening Chaps,

 

Reading your messages i am not to sure where i stand now with a defence.

 

If my copy is enforcable am i in big trouble defending this case now ?

 

The figures may be incorrect but is this enough for my defence.

 

Womble