AMEX & AIC & Newman

[ScarletPimpernel]

Me too. I started with RMA, but they went away after a formal complaint about them breaching the Data Protection Act. I now have Newmans and AIC chasing - each have two accounts. RMA did respond to a CCA by providing application forms which are patently unenforceable. I have now raised a formal dispute with Amex, both for penalty charges and lack of an enforceable agreement.

 

Nothing heard from Newman's or the sweaties at AIC. I suspect that Amex realise the reality of the situation as they have tried the old moral argument - always a good combat indicator that they know their case is hopeless.

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks Guys.

Is that the next stage then - raise a formal complaint with Amex or go back to Newmans again??

[2Grumpy]

In your case the debt is still owned by Amex, so you can raise a formal complain with both. You can also make a complaint to Amex that AIC hasn't responded.

 

Grumpy

[Monty2007]

Amex have passed me to Vilcollections who send the same threats but these are automated threat-o-grams and I have decided not to respond and now report Amex to the FOS.

[Blue Thunder]

As a further update to this long running saga:

Having only received a copy of the original CCA from Newmans I kept pushing them with standard letters as previously prescribed in this thread. Now I have received a threatening letter from stevensdrake solicitors demanding full payment - which includes 3 grand in charges and interest on top of the original 10.3k debt otherwise they will issue legal proceedings.

Having read certain threads regarding these clowns and some of their previous antics I am concerned as to what they a) can do and b) will do in an attempt to recover this debt.

I would appreciate some further advice, bearing in mind all of the original comments regarding the fact that this was an unenforceable agreement.

The bottom line is that I would gladly reach an agreement with Amex to pay off the original debt but at a reduced amount and without interest AND subject to the default being removed - does anybody think that this is a) workable and b) actually needed - or do I just resist and fight them in court as this is the route it seems to be going.

I know that many people have had many similar experiences - but there appears to be conflicting results. I just want the default removed and to begin repayment really - but if they continue to be asses - where do I stand.

 

PLEASE HELP!

[ScarletPimpernel]

I've posted scans of the 'agreements' they've sent me on my thread; if yours are anything like these I can't see any solicitor trying to take them to court. However, in many law firms doing this sort of work it may be that no-one qualified will actually deal with the papers - so it's possible that they will issue a claim. However, they are so clearly unenforceable the defence should be easy.

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks Scarlet - it would appear so.

[Blue Thunder]

Hi - to anybody that can help me.

 

After this long-running saga I have now been issued with a Court Claim Form (from Brighton County Court) - is this the same as the old Court Summons?

As you can see from earlier posts in this threat - I have been told by numerous people on the forum that my case would be enitirely unenforceable through the courts - owing to the fact that I originally signed a Credit Application Form.

Despite repeated requests and having followed the guides/letters in this string - i have only ever received copies of this one original document.

 

It would appear though that Stevensdrake solicitors/ Amex are confident enough to ignore all that and come after me through the courts for the original debt of just over £10 grand PLUS a further 4 and a half grand in charges/interest etc since the original default - which was just over 12 months ago.

Can somebody please give me advice on what to do now - I cant afford expensive solicitors and am I just wasting more time and money trying to defend this. They must be confident by going to court - but how true have the staements so far been on here that the original agreement is truly enenforceable.

Has anybody had similar experience with this and come unstuck when going to court.

My gut feel is to fight it all the way as it seems so unfair when I have made payment offers since day one which have been rejected by AIC then Newmans and now the third one hasnt even offered me that facility and insist on taking me to court.

 

HELP PLEASE - this is sending me over the edge. I simply cannot afford to have a judgement registered against me but Nor can I pay them anywhere near what they are claiming.

 

All help will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Blue.

[palomino]

Yes, that's the new version of the old summons.

 

You should lodge a defence stating that the claim cannot succeed because the claimant is unable to prove they have an agreement that complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The case should therefore be struck out.

 

You should gather up all your paperwork on the matter and ensure it is safe. Don't send it with the defence - that will come later.

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks for the response palomino.

I am just worried and sorry for doubting people who obviously know better than me - Is it a cast iron certainty that it will be struck out. Is there a case that can be referred to in any of these forums where Joe Public has actually won against any of these DCA's/Solicitors on the basis of such an application for Credit form being un-defendable???

I just dont understand why these solicitors would pursue through the courts after all I have threatened them with if they thought they had no chance - or am I just being too logical??

[palomino]

I am just worried and sorry for doubting people who obviously know better than me - Is it a cast iron certainty that it will be struck out. Is there a case that can be referred to in any of these forums where Joe Public has actually won against any of these DCA's/Solicitors on the basis of such an application for Credit form being un-defendable???

 

Nothing is cast-iron in the courts (it depends on the judge) but let's just say you have an excellent case. As to any specific cases I believe there are but I'll have to let more knowledgable people comment.

 

I just dont understand why these solicitors would pursue through the courts after all I have threatened them with if they thought they had no chance - or am I just being too logical??

 

They do it because they can. And also in the expectation that you won't defend the case and it will go through on the nod. Undefended cases are dealt with by a clerk and the details of the claim are never put before a judge. There are hundreds of undefended cases every day.

 

Don't even bother thinking about a utopia where solicitors are universally honest and judges perfectly impartial. Judges are subject to the vagaries of human nature. I won't say anything about solicitors.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I won't say anything about solicitors.

 

I will. In my experience, solicitors are like prostitutes - they will do anything for their clients, providing the money is right.

 

Amex seem to be becoming increasingly aggressive these days with regard to issuing claims. I agree with Palomino's analysis that they do it in the expectation of a default judgment because the defendant is unaware of their rights.

 

I also suspect that there is increasing pressure upon the collections drones to be seen to be taking action, so that the shareholders may be comforted that no matter how irresponsible the lending, how poor the paperwork, and how hopeless the legal case, Amex are doing all they can to claw in as much as possible.

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks guys.

One final question - in terms of defence would you, in your opinion, recommend me taking professional legal advice or trying to do this myself - cant afford to make mistakes - but can't afford the cost of my own solicitor???

[ScarletPimpernel]

If it were me (and I suspect my turn will come soon - I am), I'd do it myself with help from CAG. Because Amex's agreements don't meet the legal requirements, it should be relatively easy. If they've added 'file referral fees' they don't meet OFT requirements and can be challenged too.

 

PT2537 has some excellent defences that will meet the case - send him a pm (but note that he's not available until 06 Aug).

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks Scarlet - really do appreciate the help!

[Blue Thunder]

I did send PT2537 a PM with details but as yet have not had a response. Can anybody else help - I tried to forward the PM again to PT but the site keeps bucking it.

 

PT2537 - if you can read this and are available to help can you let me know please?

I have to respond TODAY to the court claim.

[palomino]

Without pt's help we'll go with what you have.

 

You have to say in your defence the basis of the claim is a properly executed agreement that is compliant with the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The claimant has provided an application form as a purported agreement but that it isn't compliant because .

Because there is no properly and compliant agreement there is no basis for a claim and therefore it should be struck out.

Alternatively if the claimant is able to produce the agreement in Court it must be the original and not a copy.

 

Curious : why have you left it to the very last minute? I gave you the general drift a week ago - if you had drafted something up at the time then we could have checked it through but it's too late now.

[palomino]

One more thing - you should also add to your defence that, in the event that the claimants can produce a properly and compliant agreement then you are disputing the significant charges added by the claimants which they have failed to itemise or explain. You believe these charges are unlawful or wholely unreasonable and that you are denying that part of the claim.

[Blue Thunder]

Thank you again Palomino.

I do appreciate what you are saying about waiting until the last minute - but I need to post something out tomorrow latest and had waited to see if PT would respond with a standard template. Obviously he is otherwise engaged -so please do not be offended as it is plain to see you know what you are talking about.

I am going to post a draft on here and see what you (or anybody else) thinks. Please feel free to make comments as necessary

Best regards

Blue

[Blue Thunder]

Ok here is my draft proposal:

 

Dear Sirs,

 

I refer to the Court Claim Reference No. xxxxxxxxxxx dated xxxxx

 

I ask for this Claim to be struck out owing to the following:

 

The basis of this claim relies upon the claimant being able to produce a properly executed Agreement that is compliant with the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. To date the Claimant has only been able to provide a copy of an Application Form as a purported Agreement. The said Application does not meet the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as this act clearly states the following:

 

This is the bit I need help with........................so what needs to go here?...................

I must add that should the Claimant be able to produce a compliant and properly executed Agreement, then I am disputing the significant amount of charges that the Claimant has added and have failed to either itemise or explain. I believe these to be unlawful and wholely unreasonable and I deny that part of the claim.

 

On the basis of the above I again ask for this claim to be struck out.

 

Your faithfully,

 

(not particularly eloquent and legal sounding I agree - so if anybody can add better prose then please do)

[Blue Thunder]

Perhaps I misunderstood about the time frame. I have discovered that I can send the Acknowledgement of service today which gives me 14 days to submit a defence - so anything you guys would like to add towards my defence would be appreciated

[Cunning Plan]

Hi Blue Thunder.

 

Stick with it. I'm a little bit further down the road with Amex and Co. Allocation Questionnaires and Court Directions have been dealt with and Amex has failed to supply paperwork as directed by the court, naughty bunnies, so my day in court opposite them is only a few weeks away. As they've ignored court directions the judge should begin with a rollicking of their representative. That's if it gets that far, here's hoping.

 

CP

[Blue Thunder]

HI CP,

 

Thanks for your message - I have trouble posting on here some days as it keeps bucking me out - so apologies for the delay in responding. Are you able to share some details of how your has progressed. I have received a letter back from their solicitors giving me grief about disclosure. I did try and post it on here for comments.

BUT I need to submit my defence tomorrow and having tried to load stuff on here for 4 days now without success and in the hope of getting some decent responses - I am in danger of becoming unstuck

 

So HELP please.

I am send ing this then another one with an attachment and see how this works.

Best regards

Blue

[Blue Thunder]

Hi,

I just PM'd PT2537 and then realised he is offline for a month or so!!!

So if there are any other offers of help it would be much appreciated.

[Cunning Plan]

Hi Blue Thunder,

 

Assuming you made a request under Civil Procedure Rules to Amex and their representatives and they are not forthcoming with the information make sure you bring this to the attention of the court in your defence. Write it in simple terms - you asked the claimant for information - they failed to provided it within a reasonable time - therefore you can't compile a comprehensive defence.

Its likely the court will instruct Amex to provide the information by a certain date. The case will be stayed for, possibly, a month while they do this.

 

CP