Lowell Portfolio (Barclays) have issued a County Court Claim....help!

[noomill060]

Floundering here.

 

Input from someone who knows what they are on about would help...

[noomill060]

OK, I'll go and spend the rest of the night reading the CCA

[steven4064]

A £30 charge on 1/08/02 @ 27.5% compound is now £157.08.

 

 

From 01/08/02 to 01/08/08 is exactly 6 years. Therefore the £30 becomes

 

30 * (1.275)^6 = £128.88,

 

the interest component being £98.88

[classylady18]

I dont mind if they withdraw their claim, i would still claim against Barclays;)

 

I would have thought that if Lowells had bought the debt then they would take on everything else too? Even if they only paid 20% of the debt..hehe!

 

A bank or creditor, buying back a debt seems is not something ive heard on the forums that i have searched on - does anyone know of or had any experience of this happening? I would have thought that once a debt is sold that is final?

 

"Confused.com"

 

CL

[classylady18]

Thanks Steven4064,

 

I have used the compound calculator that the very helpful Noomill gave me the link to and put the same figures in as you just gave, but i got a different amount??

 

Im is a little confused...again! Its not difficult

[the main man]

I think? there are two forms of assignment, one equitable (rights and benefits), and one absolute (with obligations)

 

 

How you find out from them I dont know? but once you put your counterclaim in, I am sure you will soon find out:grin:

[classylady18]

Thanks Main Man.

 

I think i need to get googling on this one

[noomill060]

There are many ways to calculate interest.

 

The program Compound interest calculator works on a 360 day year (like the banks) and the interest being compounded monthly (like the banks)

 

No bank has ever corrected my claims for interest, nor would they- if they they did they would have to answer the simple question-

 

"So, how DO you calculate interest, then?"

 

In the same way as they will NEVER reveal their costs, they would NEVER reveal such a sensitive piece of commercial data.

[noomill060]

Assigning A Debt Or Benefit Of Contract? - Information Technology Law Articles and News - Lawdit Reading Room

 

6 December 2005

 

Assigning A Debt Or Benefit Of Contract?

It is important to first provide the debtor with a notice of the assignment!

Other points and issues that should be borne in mind:

· In principle, the benefit of a contract can be legally assigned without consent,

provided there is no express prohibition on assignment or, for example, a requirement that consent

is obtained.

· Where there is no restriction on assignment, the usual way of assigning the benefit of

contractual rights is by statutory assignment. The assignment must be in writing, signed by the

assignor, absolute (not purporting to be by way of charge only) and notice in writing must be

given to the other contracting party (section 136, Law of Property Act 1925).

· If a contract is not effectively assigned under statute, it may still be assigned under

common law by an equitable assignment. An equitable assignment may exist where the requirements

for a statutory assignment are not satisfied. The main practical consequence of an equitable

assignment is that the assignee cannot bring an action in its own name against the third party,

but must fall back on the rules governing equitable assignments and join the assignor as a party

to the action.

It is, in any event, desirable for notice of an assignment to be given to the third party because

the third party will otherwise be entitled to continue to make payments to the assignor. Notice

will give the assignee priority over any other assignee that has failed to give notice, provided

there is no knowledge of such prior assignment.

· The burden of a contract cannot be assigned. It is therefore necessary to novate, rather

than assign, certain contracts. Novation is, in effect, the rescission of one contract and the

substitution of a new contract in which the same acts are to be performed but by different parties.

· On the sale of a business, the asset purchase agreement may specifically assign the

benefit of the seller's contracts to the purchaser. Assuming that there is no restriction on

assignment, this amounts to a statutory assignment, provided that notice is also given to the

other contracting party. If assignment is not possible, or only possible with consent, the asset

purchase agreement may provide that such contracts are held on trust pending the obtaining of

formal consent to assign or novate.

Trade debts often remain with the seller on the sale of a business because giving written notice

of the assignment of the debt to each debtor can, depending on the number of debtors, be time

consuming and expensive. Where the trade debts remain with the seller, the seller may continue to

collect the debts, or else the buyer may collect the debts as agent for the seller.

As the burden of a contract may not be assigned, liability for breach of contract stays with the

seller, who will therefore seek an indemnity from the buyer in relation to any breach occurring

after completion.

[classylady18]

I have already worked my Compound interest out and i am happy with the figure ive got..hehe just over 5k is all good!

 

I think i will leave it as it is for now and if they question it id love to hear what they say !

[steven4064]

Well sort the amount out later. There are several options:

 

1. If the claim is in Barclays' name then Lowells are claiming on behalf of Barclays and you can issue a counterclaim

 

2. If the claim is in Lowells' name then they own the account and you cannot counterclaim directly. There are 2 sub-options:

 

a) sue Barclays and use the proceeds to pay of Lowells

b) bring Barclay into the case under CPR Part 19.2 and then issue a counterclaim.

 

The POC in the templates library will do for any of these cases

 

Noomill's post #83 is dead right

[noomill060]

"The main practical consequence of an equitable

assignment is that the assignee cannot bring an action in its own name against the third party,

but must fall back on the rules governing equitable assignments and join the assignor as a party

to the action."

 

In other words, if the assignment was under equity, Lowells would not be able to take action against you in just its own name.

 

classylady- are the court papers you recieved, in Lowell's name or jointly in Lowells and Barclays?

 

If only in Lowells, it would seen they have they have an statutory or absolute assignment and bought the obligations as well and rights and privileges, so can be counter claimed against.

[classylady18]

The claim is in Lowells name as i previously said, so does this mean i cannot counterclaim?? I am now really concerned because i have already sent my AOS off to say im going to defend...and my defence was the counterclaim, right?

 

Feeling abit deflated...

[classylady18]

Noomill, the court papers are in Lowell Portfolio 1 name - but the signiture is Lowell Financial lol.

 

From reading your post before i think that your are correct because if they have statutory or absolute assignment then i could counter claim.... im not the best at legal jarbon but i think we have that bit right?

[noomill060]

classylady- my interpretation of the above is contradicted by steven4064.

 

Probably best if you go with his suggestion.

 

(This is the great thing about these forums- if you talk nonsense you are soon corrected.)

[classylady18]

Oops i meant jargon ! (its the free wine from uswitch lol!)

[the main man]

I still think you would be able to counterclaim, its just a matter of finding out if you have to add Barclays as co respondents?

[classylady18]

Do you have any info on bringing Barclay (or any other bank) into the case under CPR Part 19.2?

 

I am getting abit worried that i have sent my AOS of the say im defending but i dont know what my case is based on. Well i do but im not a confident person lol

[classylady18]

Thats a good point Main man - its just how i find out...i mite call the courts, surely they would knwo, theres enough bank charges claims !

[noomill060]

What amazes me it that they have the audacity to issue a claim for a load of fake debt, the very legality of which is in dispute at the OFT's High Court test case.

[noomill060]

The court wont advise you.

 

The answer to your question will most likely appear the next time steven4064 checks this thread out.

[noomill060]

The debt is made up of unlawful penalty charges. The mere fact that this fake debt has been assigned doesnt change that.

[classylady18]

I agree! Do you think that maybe Barclays flogged the debt for peanuts shortly after i had started reclaimg bank charges, knowing that Lowells are complete muppets who will pay diddly squat to be..shall we say.. f*cked be the consumers!

 

I think so... DCAls are so dim!!

[classylady18]

*DCA's

[noomill060]

If I sell you a dead horse, it is still just as dead, despite its new owner.