HUMBLEMAN vs HFC-WEIGHTMANS COURT ACTION

[humbleman]

I feel it's a very clear case in so far as the application form is illegible and whilst clearly in dispute they sold the debt to phoenix half way through the claim.

[geoffmr1]

Hi Humbleman,

 

Although the debts been assigned to Phoenix, as was mine, have they actually registered that with the Court yet?? When I had my CMC the representative they sent still claimed to be working on behalf of HFC. If so make sure you bring that up with the Judge.

 

I know each Judge is different but I doubt he'll even look at the application form or anything to do with that when you go.

[humbleman]

Hi Humbleman,

 

Although the debts been assigned to Phoenix, as was mine, have they actually registered that with the Court yet?? When I had my CMC the representative they sent still claimed to be working on behalf of HFC. If so make sure you bring that up with the Judge.

 

I know each Judge is different but I doubt he'll even look at the application form or anything to do with that when you go.

 

They have changed the claimant to Phoenix, if that's what you mean. They have not sent me a notice of assignment or anything.

[humbleman]

received my draft directions from Weightmans to day

 

1.a. disclosure by x april

b inspection/copies served no later than x+14 days

 

2. each party serve W.S. no later a month afterwards.

 

3. only eveidence of those witness whose evidence is exchanged may be relied upon at trial

 

4. Each party to request clarification on disclosed documents no later tha 14 days after disclosure, such request to be dealt within 21 days.

 

5 Each party must file pre-trial check list by x june

 

6. trial date to be fixed in July 2009

 

7. costs in the case

 

 

Is this quite normal.

[humbleman]

I would like to send my draft as follows:

 

The case be struck out unless the claimant within 7 days files with the court and the defendant

 

1 An enforceable agreement together terms and conditions that allow them to sell the debt.

 

2. Original copy of N.O.A.

[citizenB]

Arent draft directions filed in court with the AQ ?.

[robcag]

Arent draft directions filed in court with the AQ ?.

 

I could be wrong, but I think it's possible to file draft directions at other stages of the proceedings, I know it's certainly possible if you make an application. Obviously this would incur fees unless the defendant is exempt.

 

Cheers

Rob

[humbleman]

would a judge ask

 

do you owe this money?

 

at the CMC

[car2403]

Probably. Do you know what you would say?

[humbleman]

Probably. Do you know what you would say?

 

No.

[car2403]

No.

 

Well, you can't dispute that the debt is owed - to do so would bring in to question the legitimacy of the debt, therefore to alledge Fraud to an extent. If you deny the debt is owed, it will probably be enforced against you and you'll find yourself having to appeal that decision - all of which is very long winded and not without it's stress.

 

What you need to focus on (or, more appropriately, get the Judge to focus on) is the legal requirements and obligations on the lender and how they have failed to meet them, rather than any moral arguments about whether you do or do not owe the money. Of course there are some that believe no money can be owed under a debt that doesn't comply with the CCA, but the Judge will see that as an attempt to avoid enforcement and will probably act as such.

 

It's not an easy question to answer - which is why you probably will be asked it - but being prepared and knowing your case inside and out will prepare you to handle it as best you can. Viewing threads where this has happened before will also let you know what you're in for, if you'd care to have a read through them.

[humbleman]

Well, you can't dispute that the debt is owed - to do so would bring in to question the legitimacy of the debt, therefore to alledge Fraud to an extent. If you deny the debt is owed, it will probably be enforced against you and you'll find yourself having to appeal that decision - all of which is very long winded and not without it's stress.

 

What you need to focus on (or, more appropriately, get the Judge to focus on) is the legal requirements and obligations on the lender and how they have failed to meet them, rather than any moral arguments about whether you do or do not owe the money. Of course there are some that believe no money can be owed under a debt that doesn't comply with the CCA, but the Judge will see that as an attempt to avoid enforcement and will probably act as such.

 

This is not a trial I am going to its just a case management hearing, so I am hoping it will not be a issue at the moment,

[humbleman]

Is the draft directions from Weightmans, posted on #129 pretty standard

[car2403]

This is not a trial I am going to its just a case management hearing, so I am hoping it will not be a issue at the moment,

 

I know, but it may decide how long the trial window for the hearing is.

[geoffmr1]

Is the draft directions from Weightmans, posted on #129 pretty standard

 

I'd say yes as they are exactly the same as the ones Weightmans requested at my CMC (different dates obviously).

 

I doubt the judge will agree to the ones you are requesting as the case is based on the agreement. The enforceability of & reasons why/why not is for the Judge to decide at trial not at the conference.

 

Again I doubt the Judge will ask if you owe the money at this point, however, should he do so just point out that it's not a simple yes or no answer. You can say you did have use of the money, however future events have led you to believe that it no longer repayable.

[geoffmr1]

Forgot to say, any part of Weightmans directions you don't agree with you can bring up & have dates altered etc.

[humbleman]

GEOFFMR1

 

Thanks for your input

[citizenB]

I'd say yes as they are exactly the same as the ones Weightmans requested at my CMC (different dates obviously).

 

I doubt the judge will agree to the ones you are requesting as the case is based on the agreement. The enforceability of & reasons why/why not is for the Judge to decide at trial not at the conference.

 

Again I doubt the Judge will ask if you owe the money at this point, however, should he do so just point out that it's not a simple yes or no answer. You can say you did have use of the money, however future events have led you to believe that it no longer repayable.

 

Do you have all your statements ?. If so a simple exercise is to do a spreadsheet (for you own use at this stage). Columns should be

 

money spent,

monies paid in

interest amounts

any PPI if applicable.

 

If you add up all those columns independantly you might just find that you have paid back much more than you have borrowed and the balance they are asking for is possibly made up of interest and without the agreement with the prescribed terms etc, then there is nothing to say they are entitled to charge interest.

 

You can then genuinely say that you have repaid any thing you owe.

[humbleman]

They have not even sent me all the statements.

[citizenB]

They have not even sent me all the statements.

 

Then how are they intending to prove the balance they say you owe?

[humbleman]

I was at a Case Management hearing where I asked the judge to make an order that HFC/Phoenix bring the original of the agreement at the hearing, he admited that HFC have admitted that they do not have the original so there was no point.

 

The other point I raised was that I have not been served with a NOA from the OC or Phoenix and again he was not bothered about it, the solicitor representing Phoenix said that Weightmans have sent me a letter informing that the debt has been assigned.

 

I now want to apply for the claim to be struck out on the basis that they do not have a legible copy of the agreement.

 

Can someone point me to particulars of claim that might be appropriate.

[pt2537]

I was at a Case Management hearing where I asked the judge to make an order that HFC/Phoenix bring the original of the agreement at the hearing, he admited that HFC have admitted that they do not have the original so there was no point.

 

The other point I raised was that I have not been served with a NOA from the OC or Phoenix and again he was not bothered about it, the solicitor representing Phoenix said that Weightmans have sent me a letter informing that the debt has been assigned.

 

I now want to apply for the claim to be struck out on the basis that they do not have a legible copy of the agreement.

 

Can someone point me to particulars of claim that might be appropriate.

did the judge give any directions to either side?

[humbleman]

Standard Directions

 

1.a. disclosure by x april

b inspection/copies served no later than x+14 days

 

2. each party serve W.S. no later a month afterwards.

 

3. only eveidence of those witness whose evidence is exchanged may be relied upon at trial

 

4. Each party to request clarification on disclosed documents no later tha 14 days after disclosure, such request to be dealt within 21 days.

 

5 Each party must file pre-trial check list by x june

 

6. trial date to be fixed in July 2009

 

7. costs in the cas

[trevor33]

Hi Humbleman. Been watching your thread for ages.

I am in the same boat with HFC and Weightmans but I am further down the line. (Trial next Wednesday) I have been going now for nearly 2 years.

Have a look at my thread, there may be something of use.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hfc-household/130898-hfc-agreement-turned-up-9.html

I have posted about half way through, but you are welcome to read the lot.

Trevor.

[humbleman]

Trevor

 

Your thread is on my watch list and been following.

 

All the best for next Wednesday