Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just an update on Celticheart37 versus Barclaycard.   On the claim for my late Husband's PPI, Barclaycard have responded saying they have been unable to locate a PPI Policy . They say he held his card since 1979 ( not the late 1980's as I had believed) which means that PPI did not exist and that is fair enough. I accept that PPI did not exist in 1979 so couldn't have been included. So that is the end of that one.They could have told me that at the beginning rather than let me search for proof that would not exist , but never mind.   On my own Barclaycard claim for which they have offered me a refund  "based on averages", I have sent a SAR requesting my statements back to 1993 when the account opened,so hello 12345 I will post an update when I get a response and let you know how far back  they were able to go !   Celticheart37
    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
  • Our picks

gavman99

Bankruptcy in Scotland - Self Sequestration

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4187 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

A friend of mine who lives in Scotland has no job, no assets and thousands of pounds of debt.

 

She wants to make herself bankrupt, however Scottish Law states that in order to apply for self-sequestration, one of her creditors must have served her one of the following :-

 

1. a Charge for Payment and fourteen days notice have elapsed or,

2. a Statutory Demand and 21 days have elapsed or,

3. an Earnings Arrestment as a result of a Charge for Payment.

 

She has received a letter which is titled "Default notice served under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974"

 

If she doesnt pay the outstanding amount before 16th January 2008 they will (quoted):-

 

1. With effect from the date shown, by this notice we terminate the agreement, close your bank account and demand payment imediately of any amount you owe us on your account: and

2. on or after the date shown, we may take legal proceedings against you and/or instruct a debt collection agency to recover any amount you owe uson your account.

 

Does anyone know if this letter is considered a "charge for payment" or a "statutory demand" as per the above ?

 

Many thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if this letter is considered a "charge for payment" or a "statutory demand" as per the above ?

 

No it isn't. It is just a default notice which has to be served before the account is transfered to a DCA or legal action is taken to attempt to enforce the account.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

YOU CAN NOW COMPLAIN TO THE OFT ABOUT THEIR CONDUCT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR TRADING REGULATIONS 2008.

 

 

 

Complaint to the OFT about DCA's threatening legally action on statute barred accounts

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for your quick answer.

 

Do you know if theres any way she can speed up the process of getting one of these letters ? It has already been dragging on for 5 months. All she gets is letters from either the comanies she owes money to or the debt collection agencies they have passed her details to. But it seems no-one wants to take her to court. All they do is sell the debt on to some other debt collection agency.

 

Citizens Advice Bureau told her not to respond to the letters or telephone them. I'm not sure how this is helping though ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was in her position I would respond to the letters by asking them to make me bankrupt. Don't do anything over the phone, it needs to be in writing. Sequestration will change in April under the new act - I'll have a look at it and see if there is anything in it that might help her.


HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

YOU CAN NOW COMPLAIN TO THE OFT ABOUT THEIR CONDUCT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR TRADING REGULATIONS 2008.

 

 

 

Complaint to the OFT about DCA's threatening legally action on statute barred accounts

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay having looked at the new Act she is really still going to have to ask her creditors to make her bankrupt or write off the debt. Is she likely to be going back to work in the near future? If so she may also wish to look at a protected trust deed or a Debt Arrangement Scheme (DAS).


HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

YOU CAN NOW COMPLAIN TO THE OFT ABOUT THEIR CONDUCT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR TRADING REGULATIONS 2008.

 

 

 

Complaint to the OFT about DCA's threatening legally action on statute barred accounts

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is also an amount she must owe as well.

 

I know in 2001 it was £5000.

 

 

Idax


Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...