Help - Mum being taken to court by Link Financial.

[someone_else]

Just re-read the thread (apologies for being half asleep!).

 

Was a full copy of the agreement not attached to the court paper work they served on your mum?

 

The only thing we received from the court was the blue claim form with the PoC I typed in my second post.

 

When we received that we sent off a letter to Link requesting all docs under CCA74 s77/78 on ~25 July, that they received on the 28th July, but they didn't bother responding to it until the 29th August after our initial defence had been submitted. (Is their someone you can report them to if it took them over 28 days to reply?)

 

What they sent was what I scanned into my post on Sunday (there was also an invoice for the car and a DD form that I didn't bother scanning). That only included the first two pages of the contract and was missing several letters from Ford, Link and made no mention of the fact one of them employed a detective agency to locate the car Ford had already taken - they don't seem to have included anything that makes them look bad, they have also forgot to include various letters they sent in the past adding charges to the account hence why the amount they are claiming isn't backed up by their paperwork. (It's a shame they didn't include any record of any attempts Link made to phone us, as I think for several months they were phoning several times a day, before they'd even sent any paperwork proving they own the debt).

[TheChancellor]

I'm pretty new to all this SE but I thought a copy of the disputed contract (loan agreement, lease,etc) had to be served alongside the summons form? Maybe it's not obligatory - I'll bump it for someone more experienced to have a look at for you.

[bazaar]

I know this is a little after the horse has bolted, but before any repossession, you should always go to a garage to enquire about buying a new vehicle and use your current vehicle as part exchange, You would then have documented evidence of the vehicles worth and the little repo men could not falsify sums like they have most certainly made with your mum. Just out of interest, do you know anyone who has a similar vehicle? You could always try that and get a realistic price. You need to contest their figures, but you'll need to prepare the necessary argument. IE, Check autotrader for private prices, then check dealership prices. You can safely argue for a figure in between these 2. Sorry this doesnt help too much in your case, but hopefully someone else will benefit later.

[someone_else]

I know this is a little after the horse has bolted, but before any repossession, you should always go to a garage to enquire about buying a new vehicle and use your current vehicle as part exchange, You would then have documented evidence of the vehicles worth and the little repo men could not falsify sums like they have most certainly made with your mum. Just out of interest, do you know anyone who has a similar vehicle? You could always try that and get a realistic price. You need to contest their figures, but you'll need to prepare the necessary argument. IE, Check autotrader for private prices, then check dealership prices. You can safely argue for a figure in between these 2. Sorry this doesnt help too much in your case, but hopefully someone else will benefit later.

 

Unfortantley we didn't have time to go to a garage (or even thought about) they just came round one night and took the car, my mum even offered to return the car that they turned down. I did have a quick look on the internet yesterday and it seems the same model is for sale for £5K-£6K so two years ago £5K would have been low.

 

Does anyone know of any law/guidelines that have to be followed with the auction of a repossesed car? Do they have to get a fair value or can they sell it to someone they know for whatever they want?

[TheChancellor]

Unfortantley we didn't have time to go to a garage (or even thought about) they just came round one night and took the car, my mum even offered to return the car that they turned down. I did have a quick look on the internet yesterday and it seems the same model is for sale for £5K-£6K so two years ago £5K would have been low.

 

Does anyone know of any law/guidelines that have to be followed with the auction of a repossesed car? Do they have to get a fair value or can they sell it to someone they know for whatever they want?

 

I think it has to go through a public auction but obviously at the moment nothing is fetching any money.

 

To be fair mine went in the spring & fetched a lot more money than I expected so fingers crossed.

[someone_else]

I was wondering if someone could help with the filling in of the Allocation Questionnaire the one we have is N149, I've had a look on the forums and it seems to be worder differently than others (others seem to be the N150 or are the claimant)

 

A (Settlement), B (Location) and C (Track) F (hearing) and I (signature) are fine.

 

D Witness - If I want to go along to court with my mum do I count as a witness or is this just for people providing evidence for example?

 

E Experts - is this just No.

 

G Other Infomation - Is this where we write our defence, do we need to include names of docs we refer to and/or copies of said docs, do we need to provide copies of the docs Link provided under 77/78 if we reference them?

 

H Fee - Do we leave this blank as we are the defendent and are not counterclaiming.

 

Also is there a time limit on the date that it needs to be at the court?

[bazaar]

OK, so they repoed car and sold it for approximately how much?

Now they are claiming £3500 approx. It was a hire purchase. I'm not too sure but I'm of the opinion that they could only claim the outstanding payments prior to taking the car. When they took it, you obviously are not hiring it or purchasing it any more, so the 'agreement' was cancelled.

I think you'll be going for a counterclaim, because they would have added charges. But lets see what Agent 20 or PT think.

[someone_else]

OK, so they repoed car and sold it for approximately how much?

Now they are claiming £3500 approx. It was a hire purchase. I'm not too sure but I'm of the opinion that they could only claim the outstanding payments prior to taking the car. When they took it, you obviously are not hiring it or purchasing it any more, so the 'agreement' was cancelled.

I think you'll be going for a counterclaim, because they would have added charges. But lets see what Agent 20 or PT think.

 

They say they sold the car for £5200 (the rather dodgy looking auction form was scanned on the first page) and they are claiming that ~£3500 is still owed, though the docs they have provided don't really show where that figure came from.

We are not counterclaiming at the moment, just mainly want the debt wiping out due to the way that Ford/Link have treated my mum.

[bazaar]

I may be being naive here, but they took the car back and therefore ALL the resposibility for it. If they had crashed it when it was taken, would they come after you for it? Now if you still had the car, then I can understand them asking for the amount, they cant have it both ways.

[someone_else]

This is a rough defence I've written for part G of the N149 form, any comments would be appreciated, also any advice on legal language:

 

1. No agreement was taken out in writing on the 16th August 2005.

2. Dispute date cause of action arose, Letter provided by claimant states Sale of Debt was on the 1st May 2008 not the 12th December 2007.

3. Sale of Debt letter states original contract was with Ford Credit Europe Plc. No agreement was taken out with Ford Credit Europe Plc, further to that according to companies house no such company currently known as Ford Credit Europe Plc is registered in the UK.

4. Amount of £3554.99 in Dispute documents provided by claimant do not show how this amount was obtained.

a. Documents provided by claimant show various unexplained credits/debits to account balance (Auction sheet shows auction value of £5200, but only £5,104.24 credited to account. Repo advice sheet shows unexplained calculation at bottom of page etc...).

5. Dates of claim for interest disputed, Sale of Debt only occurred on the 1st May 2008, yet interest claimed from 12th December 2007.

6. Debt is unenforceable under the consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 77/78 as claimant has failed to provide a complete copy of the executed agreement and of any other document referred to in it, that was requested in writing and received by the claimant on the 28 July 2008 (Royal Mail REF: ###). The copy of the agreement received from the claimant after the 29th August 2008 failed to include pages 3 and 4 of the agreement and the “Pre-Contract Information” Document referenced in the agreement, until these documents are provided the claimant under law is not entitled to enforce the agreement and as more than one month has now passed have committed an offence.

7. Claimant failed to provide all documents relating to the agreement when requested under Section 77/78 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

8. A valid default notice from FCE Bank plc has not been received, as date of agreement on served default notices is incorrect.

9. The claimant and original creditor have refused any and all attempts in the past to come to an arrangement.

a. Despite making an agreement over the phone to pay £100 a week in July 2006, the original creditor issued the default notice on the 11th July 2006 with the intention to reposes the car, when contacting FCE Bank plc I was told that my offer of payment was turned down, and I was advised over the phone to sell the car despite this clearly being against the terms of my contract (4(b)).

b. Original creditor after taking the car, after refusing my offer to return the car to the local Ford Garage employed the Manchester Private Detective Agency to track down the car that FCE Bank plc had already reposed.

c. A budget plan submitted to the Manchester Private Detective Agency offering to pay £50 a month was also turned down.

d. After the car was reposed I lost my job as a Social Care Worker that was reliant upon having a reliable car and I was forced to take a lower paid office job, also in October 2006 my Widow’s Pension was halved due to my youngest son turning 19.

e. Currently I am not in the position to make an offer of payment as shown by my budget plan. (Filling in the budget plan in the National Debtline booklet shows my mums monthly outgoings are currently ~£300 more than her income.)

10.Condition of the car at the time of auction is disputed, at the time of repossession there was no major dent to the near side rear wing.

 

 

Require claimant to provide:

1.Complete copy of the executed agreement and of any other document referred to in it as required under the consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 77/78.

2.A copy of all documents held by either the claimant, the original creditor or any third parties that have been employed by either the claimant or the original creditor including logs of any phonecalls and copies any recordings of said phonecalls.

3.A full and detailed breakdown of the balance of the account, including the dates, methods and amounts of any credits and the dates, methods, amounts and reasons for any debits to the balance of the account.

 

If a complete copy of the executed agreement and of any other document referred to in it is not produced by the claimant I wish the claim to be struck out as unenforceable.

Couple of things I'm still not sure on:

- What's a valid Notice of Assignment letter, is the Sale of Debt letter I scanned from Link valid?

- Can Link provide other documents to the court, that they didn't provide to us when we requested a copy of all documents they'll rely upon in court?

- Do we need to include copies of any documents with the N149 form, do we have to list any documents we'll be relying on?

 

Actually I've just noticed something else - the three repsossession documents each state a different repossesion date, the repo advice form states it was the 09/08/06, the Auction form states it was the 10/08/06 yet the Termination Notice we have from FCE Bank (That Link haven't supplied a copy of, do they need to supply a copy of the Termination Notice?) that was handed to my mum by the guy who took the car is dated the 01/08/06? Not sure if its important but it should throw some more doubt into mix.

 

Again thanks for any and all help provided.

[TheChancellor]

I was wondering if someone could help with the filling in of the Allocation Questionnaire the one we have is N149, I've had a look on the forums and it seems to be worder differently than others (others seem to be the N150 or are the claimant)

 

A (Settlement), B (Location) and C (Track) F (hearing) and I (signature) are fine.

 

D Witness - If I want to go along to court with my mum do I count as a witness or is this just for people providing evidence for example?

 

E Experts - is this just No.

 

G Other Infomation - Is this where we write our defence, do we need to include names of docs we refer to and/or copies of said docs, do we need to provide copies of the docs Link provided under 77/78 if we reference them?

 

H Fee - Do we leave this blank as we are the defendent and are not counterclaiming.

 

Also is there a time limit on the date that it needs to be at the court?

 

 

Hi SE

 

I'll bump it again as I can't help on these points.

 

I have read that you can acknowledge receipt of the court papers online & extend the time for the Defence to go in but there is a time limit.Please check.

[someone_else]

Sorry didn't make that very clear - the AQ has to be in by the 13th October, I was wondering if it had to be delivered to the court by a certain time or just before they close (I think they are open 10am-4pm), as my mum is off work on the Monday and can drop it off in person.

 

A couple of other things having had a look at pt2537's Directions for N149 Thread:

 

- Does anyone know what the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) says that the creditor needs to send/include, or have a link to the act (or the full 2004 version), as all I can seem to find is the additions made in 2004 not the full act. - I sortof know what the default notice should look like (answers to my questions from post #21 would help clear some stuff up) but did Link need to produce the Termination Notice in the pile of papers they gave us?

 

- Does the Notice of assignment, with proof of service of the same compliant with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Apply to a Hire Purchase Agreement? and what is a valid NOA (Is the Sale of Debt letter from Link one?)

 

Again thanks for any help.

[someone_else]

Sorry a couple more questions - I've just reskimmed through the CCA1974 and a couple more questions have come to mind.

 

First if a DCA buys a debt do they have to still follow the rules of the CCA1974 if the agreement was taken under that? And if they are someone at Link should be finding themselves fined.

 

- They failed to reply within one month and have thus committed an offence they received our request on the 28th July 2008, but didn't repond until the 29th August 2008 which is over one month (the cover letter is dated 29/08 but the envelope is postmarked 01/09 - is it the date that the docs are produced, posted or recieved that counts? doesn't really matter as all are over one month).

- They have failed to comply with 77(1) - full agreement hasn't been supplied and the doc referenced in the agreement wasn't supplied.

- They have failed to comply with 77(1) (b) and © - the docs provided don't provide the dates that the various added amounts became due.

 

- Section 172 (1) states that a statement by a creditor under 77(1) is binding. 77(1) states a covering letter must be included, that was included but in it they stated that all documents relating to the agreement were included.

 

So according to the Offences page at statutelaw.gov.uk

they have commited a level4 offence (£2,500 fine - is that for each part they failed to obey or just overall) for failing to comply with 77(4) within one month.

 

Also under Section 172 they stated they have provided all docuements which is binding so surely under this they can not produce any other document, and if they do then they lied under Section 172, though for some reason breaking 172 doesn't seem to be an offence.

 

Final thing for today does the fact that Link have said on each letter that the original creditor was Ford Credit Europe plc mean they have also committed an offence under section 9(1) and 9(2) which state "Engaging in activities requiring a licence when not a licensee." and "Carrying on a business under a name not specified in licence." are offences both punishable by upto 2 years in prison - I assume licence in this case means licenced under the FSA and there is no company currently called Ford Credit Europe plc licenced under the FSA, so according to Link they have bought the debt from a unlicenced company?

 

This brings an interesting question, would it be worth (or legal?) sending Link a letter telling them their failure to respond to the 77/78 request within one month means they have commited an offence and are liable for a fine of £2,500 but if they drop the case and wipe the debt we will leave the matter alone (or would that count as blackmail?)

[AndyOrch]

Sorry a couple more questions - I've just reskimmed through the CCA1974 and a couple more questions have come to mind.

 

First if a DCA buys a debt do they have to still follow the rules of the CCA1974 if the agreement was taken under that? And if they are someone at Link should be finding themselves fined.

 

- They failed to reply within one month and have thus committed an offence they received our request on the 28th July 2008, but didn't repond until the 29th August 2008 which is over one month (the cover letter is dated 29/08 but the envelope is postmarked 01/09 - is it the date that the docs are produced, posted or recieved that counts? doesn't really matter as all are over one month).

- They have failed to comply with 77(1) - full agreement hasn't been supplied and the doc referenced in the agreement wasn't supplied.

- They have failed to comply with 77(1) (b) and © - the docs provided don't provide the dates that the various added amounts became due.

 

- Section 172 (1) states that a statement by a creditor under 77(1) is binding. 77(1) states a covering letter must be included, that was included but in it they stated that all documents relating to the agreement were included.

 

So according to the Offences page at statutelaw.gov.uk

they have commited a level4 offence (£2,500 fine - is that for each part they failed to obey or just overall) for failing to comply with 77(4) within one month.

 

Also under Section 172 they stated they have provided all docuements which is binding so surely under this they can not produce any other document, and if they do then they lied under Section 172, though for some reason breaking 172 doesn't seem to be an offence.

 

Final thing for today does the fact that Link have said on each letter that the original creditor was Ford Credit Europe plc mean they have also committed an offence under section 9(1) and 9(2) which state "Engaging in activities requiring a licence when not a licensee." and "Carrying on a business under a name not specified in licence." are offences both punishable by upto 2 years in prison - I assume licence in this case means licenced under the FSA and there is no company currently called Ford Credit Europe plc licenced under the FSA, so according to Link they have bought the debt from a unlicenced company?

 

This brings an interesting question, would it be worth (or legal?) sending Link a letter telling them their failure to respond to the 77/78 request within one month means they have commited an offence and are liable for a fine of £2,500 but if they drop the case and wipe the debt we will leave the matter alone (or would that count as blackmail?)

 

No because the CCA1974 as been amended since and is no longer a criminal offence ie the 30 days just 12+2 now and therfore in default.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[someone_else]

In what year was that removed?

[TheChancellor]

In what year was that removed?

 

Earlier this year.April-ish I think. Under CPUTR or similar.Sorry v.tired.

[miaow99]

Re the valuation of cars - I used to work in the motor trade and Glass's Guide is the accepted authority on used car prices. Every dealer has a copy or it, or access to a copy.

 

You can get an individual valuation on the Internet - either that or you could ask a friendly car dealer as a favour.

 

Glass's Used Car Prices, Vehicle Valuations, Motorbike Prices

[someone_else]

Earlier this year.April-ish I think. Under CPUTR or similar.Sorry v.tired.

 

Was it the updated 2006 act that changed the one month and its an offence thing, surely that shouldn't apply as agreement was taken out and defaulted before the 2006 version of CCA was written?

[someone_else]

We need to get the AQ filled in today so my mum can hand it in on monday. After reading other peoples threads I take it we dont at this stage need to say which documents we are going to rely on or refer to from the claimant?

 

At the moment this is what I have can someone review it for me before tonight thanks:

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order file and serve the following:

 

1. Complete copy of the executed Credit Agreement and any documents referred to within it which complies with the consumer Credit Act 1974 and all subsequent regulations, which the claimant seeks to rely upon

 

2. A statement signed by or on behalf of the Claimant showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,--

(i) the total sum paid under the agreement by the Defendant;

(ii) the total sum which has become payable under the agreement by the Defendant but remains unpaid, and the various amounts comprised in that total sum, with the date when each became due; and

(iii) the total sum which is to become payable under the agreement by the Defendant, and the various amounts comprised in that total sum, with the date, or mode of determining the date, when each becomes due.

 

3. Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended,

 

4. Document, contract or deed of assignment.

 

5 .Notice of assignment, with proof of service of the same compliant with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

6. A copy of all documents held by either the claimant, the original creditor or any third parties that have been employed by either the claimant or the original creditor including logs of any phonecalls and copies any recordings of said phonecalls.

 

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

The Defendant shall within 14 days thereafter file and serve the following

An amended defence sufficiently particularised in response to the documents supplied by the claimant

 

Defence, do we need to repeat stuff from the draft order, defence is basically they haven't provided the needed docs under law, but from what they have provided our defence is is follows:

 

The bits in red need cleaning it, as they were quickly written

 

1.Debt is unenforceable under the consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 77/78 as claimant has failed to provide a complete copy of the executed agreement and of any other document referred to in it, that was requested in writing and received by the claimant on the 28 July 2008 (Royal Mail REF: ###). The copy of the agreement received from the claimant after the 29th August 2008 failed to include pages 3 and 4 of the agreement and the “Pre-Contract Information” Document referenced in the agreement, until these documents are provided the claimant under law is not entitled to enforce the agreement and as more than one month has now passed have committed an offence.

 

2.As required under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 77 a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing the total sum which has become payable under the agreement by the debtor but remains unpaid, and the various amounts comprised in that total sum, with the date when each became due; and the total sum which is to become payable under the agreement by the debtor, and the various amounts comprised in that total sum, with the date, or mode of determining the date, when each becomes due has not been provided when requested on the 28th July 2008.

 

3.Claimant failed to provide all documents relating to the agreement when requested under Section 77/78 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Until the above are submitted to the Defendent a full and proper defence cannot be submitted and until the above produced the debt is unenforceable.

Once the requested docs have been provided An amended defence sufficiently particularised in response to the documents supplied by the claimant will be produced.

 

The defence from provided docs so far is

 

4.No agreement was taken out in writing on the 16th August 2005.

5.Dispute date cause of action arose, Letter provided by claimant states Sale of Debt was on the 1st May 2008 not the 12th December 2007.

6.Sale of Debt letter is uneforcable as states original contract was with Ford Credit Europe Plc. No agreement was taken out with Ford Credit Europe Plc, further to that according to companies house no such company known as Ford Credit Europe Plc is registered/exists.

7.Amount of £3554.99 in Dispute documents provided by claimant do not show this amount.

a.Documents provided by claimant show various unexplained credits/debits to account balance (Auction sheet shows auction value of £5200, but only £5,104.24 credited to account. Repo advice sheet shows unexplained calculation at bottom of page).

8.Dates of claim for interest disputed, Sale of Debt only occurred on the 1st May 2008, yet interest claimed from 12th December 2007.

9.A valid default notice from FCE Bank plc has not been received, as date of agreement on served default notices is incorrect.

10.The claimant and original creditor have refused any and all attempts in the past to come to an arrangement.

a.Despite making an agreement over the phone to pay £100 a week in July 2006, the original creditor issued the default notice on the 11th July 2006 with the intention to reposes the car, when contacting FCE Bank plc I was told that my offer of payment was turned down, and I was advised over the phone to sell the car despite this clearly being against the terms of my contract (4(b)).

b.Original creditor after taking the car, after refusing my offer to return the car to the local Ford Garage employed the Manchester Private Detective Agency to track down the car that FCE Bank plc had already reposed.

c.A budget plan submitted to the Manchester Private Detective Agency offering to pay £50 a month was also turned down.

d.After the car was reposed I lost my job as a Social Care Worker that was reliant upon having a reliable car and I was forced to take a lower paid office job, also in October 2006 my Widow’s Pension was halved due to my youngest son turning 19.

e.Currently I am not in the position to make an offer of payment as shown by the budget.

11.Condition of the car at the time of auction is disputed, at the time of repossession there was no major dent to the near side rear wing.

12.No Notice of Termination has been provided by the Claimant.

13.Documents provided by the claimant have an an inconsistent date of repossession.

 

Also do the DCA's need to keep all docs for the 5/6/7 years required?

 

Thanks.

[42man]

Hi someoneelse.....i'm not an expert on these, but until somebody gives you some more advice these links might help...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/131499-directions-n150-n149-allocation.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/158235-help-allocation-questionaire-soon-2.html

[someone_else]

Hi someoneelse.....i'm not an expert on these, but until somebody gives you some more advice these links might help...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/131499-directions-n150-n149-allocation.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/158235-help-allocation-questionaire-soon-2.html

 

Yes they have helped a bit, but are mainly for when the claimant has failed to provide any docs.

 

So it's just trying to get the wording/layout right linking the fact that we can not defend fully due to incomplete documentation that we want the court to order the claimant to produce, whilst at the same time stating that we disagree with what little infomation that has been supplied.

 

Also still not sure if we need to list the documents that link have supplied, or will they provide them to the court?

[someone_else]

So for the AQ I've now got the Draft Directions page from the Directions thread and in AQ the bit from their aswell about asking the court to follow the draft directions.

 

Then I have the bit about requesting the docs and how they failed to respond within 30 days, and when they did respond they missed half the agreement, didn't provide any calculations for the amount, and failed to include all docs related to the account, then say

Until the above documents are submitted to the Defendant a full and proper defence cannot be submitted and until they are produced the debt is unenforceable under Section 77/78 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Then I link to the rest of the defence with:

Further to the above documents not being produced I dispute the following information contained in the documents provided by the Claimant so far:

And then take apart each part of the POC and each bit of the docs they have supplied that we disagree with and why.

[someone_else]

Alright my mum handed in our Allocation Questionnaire to the court on Monday 13th October, Link hadn’t actually provided there one at that time, but yesterday we received in the post a copy of Links AQ that they forwarded to us aswell as the court, however it brings it some more questions.

 

Allocation Questionnaire Questions:

 

Under (A) Settlement – they state they want one month to try and settle – is this just standard (I assume so as it asks you explain why you don’t want to settle), I take it they also try and use this against you (we tried to settle but the defendant said no etc...)

 

Under (D) Case Management Information, they have put the following statement into the Witness Name box:

“The Claimant would wish to rely upon its witness statement (and would hereby put parties upon notice of its intention to rely upon hearsay evidence).”

Is that a standard statement? And what does ‘hearsay evidence’ mean in a legal sense? And do we get to see a copy of this witness statement in advance/at all?

The Witness to which facts box is empty.

 

And now we come to the interesting part of the AQ – (I) Other Information – here they say they have attached docs and sent them to us, does this mean in court they can only rely upon the docs attached to the AQ?

 

Then they state that we received the documents on the 30/08/08 – which is a downright lie, the envelope that the docs arrived in is postdated/franked 01/09/08 so it is impossible for us to have received them on the 30th as they hadn’t even been posted then.

Now the errors/mistakes/lies in the all the other documents can be put down to honest mistakes or blamed on the original creditor (if we are being kind), but surely lying on the AQ which is a court document has to be inexcusable and even against the law? (Also if they cannot even get a simple fact such as the date they posted some docs correct, what else have they got wrong – Am a right in thinking that the date of receipt is classed as two days after posting, so that would be the 03/09 five days later than stated.)

 

And to top it all off the AQ was signed on the 16/10/08 – three days after it was due at the court – Despite the notes with the AQ stating that if you are late the judge can strike the claim out, how do we go about getting the judge to struck the claim out if the copies they sent to the court were dated the same?

 

They have also failed to attach any extra docs to the AQ, the only ones they bothered to include with the AQ were some of the error ridden, incomplete docs they sent to us back in Sept, that I have scanned in before but have but the links to my scans down below, if these are the only docs they included with the AQ, does that mean they can only rely on the below docs in court?

 

Sale of Debt

Contract Page 1of4 and Page 2 of 4

Feb Default Notice Page 1 and Page 2 and July Default Notice Page 1 and Page 2

 

So I was wondering now what our next steps are? Do we wait and see if the court agreed to our request to get Link to provide the docs required under CCA74 s77/78 to make the debt enforceable – considering Link still haven’t provided the full contract and referenced docs or any break down of payments/transactions/charges. The 14 days we gave them to provide this info will be up next week.

 

I take it we need to also respond to Links letter saying they have asked for one month stay to settle (not that they or FCE Bank have made any effort in the past to settle) – at the moment it’ll be a case of writing a letter saying we will agree to drop this matter and not counter-sue if they agree to withdraw the claim and remove any default notices that have been applied to my mums credit file, considering their failure to produce the docs required by law means the debt is unenforceable and they are going to court frivolously without good reason.

 

Also what are the time limits on submitting an amended defence, as in light of what they have just provided we can ask for the claim to be struck out due to them so far not producing the docs and also for submitting the AQ past the deadline, and also add in the bit about them lying on the AQ.

[AndyOrch]

Alright my mum handed in our Allocation Questionnaire to the court on Monday 13th October, Link hadn’t actually provided there one at that time, but yesterday we received in the post a copy of Links AQ that they forwarded to us aswell as the court, however it brings it some more questions.

 

Allocation Questionnaire Questions:

 

Under (A) Settlement – they state they want one month to try and settle – is this just standard (I assume so as it asks you explain why you don’t want to settle), I take it they also try and use this against you (we tried to settle but the defendant said no etc...) Yes this is normal

 

Under (D) Case Management Information, they have put the following statement into the Witness Name box:

Is that a standard statement? And what does ‘hearsay evidence’ mean in a legal sense? And do we get to see a copy of this witness statement in advance/at all? Standard reply as along as the Applications is ticked no and that they have not made any

The Witness to which facts box is empty.Should be an employee/or Sol name

 

And now we come to the interesting part of the AQ – (I) Other Information – here they say they have attached docs and sent them to us, does this mean in court they can only rely upon the docs attached to the AQ? Standard response never do attach

 

Then they state that we received the documents on the 30/08/08 – which is a downright lie, the envelope that the docs arrived in is postdated/franked 01/09/08 so it is impossible for us to have received them on the 30th as they hadn’t even been posted then.

Now the errors/mistakes/lies in the all the other documents can be put down to honest mistakes or blamed on the original creditor (if we are being kind), but surely lying on the AQ which is a court document has to be inexcusable and even against the law? (Also if they cannot even get a simple fact such as the date they posted some docs correct, what else have they got wrong – Am a right in thinking that the date of receipt is classed as two days after posting, so that would be the 03/09 five days later than stated.)

 

And to top it all off the AQ was signed on the 16/10/08 – three days after it was due at the court – Despite the notes with the AQ stating that if you are late the judge can strike the claim out, how do we go about getting the judge to struck the claim out if the copies they sent to the court were dated the same? They wont strike out if 2/3 days late same would apply to yourselves.

 

They have also failed to attach any extra docs to the AQ, the only ones they bothered to include with the AQ were some of the error ridden, incomplete docs they sent to us back in Sept, that I have scanned in before but have but the links to my scans down below, if these are the only docs they included with the AQ, does that mean they can only rely on the below docs in court? They will have to produce them sometime to be able to enforce their case

 

Sale of Debt

Contract Page 1of4 and Page 2 of 4

Feb Default Notice Page 1 and Page 2 and July Default Notice Page 1 and Page 2

 

So I was wondering now what our next steps are? Do we wait and see if the court agreed to our request to get Link to provide the docs required under CCA74 s77/78 to make the debt enforceable – considering Link still haven’t provided the full contract and referenced docs or any break down of payments/transactions/charges. The 14 days we gave them to provide this info will be up next week. Inform the Court and then request an "Or Else " order with failure to disclose, will be strike out request

I take it we need to also respond to Links letter saying they have asked for one month stay to settle (not that they or FCE Bank have made any effort in the past to settle) – at the moment it’ll be a case of writing a letter saying we will agree to drop this matter and not counter-sue if they agree to withdraw the claim and remove any default notices that have been applied to my mums credit file, considering their failure to produce the docs required by law means the debt is unenforceable and they are going to court frivolously without good reason.No contact let the Court give Directions

 

Also what are the time limits on submitting an amended defence,anytime during procedures via the AN will cost you £75.00 though as in light of what they have just provided we can ask for the claim to be struck out due to them so far not producing the docs and also for submitting the AQ past the deadline, and also add in the bit about them lying on the AQ.

Not reason enough ,let it take its Course they will have to comply eventually if this ever gets to trial

Regards

Andy

[someone_else]

Alright so it has now been over 14 days (22 days) since our AQ was submitted asking the court to ask Link to provide the docs to make the alledged debt enforceable, and nothing has arrived since the copy of Links AQ that just included docs we've already been given.

 

Now is it worth writing to Link asking them to withdraw the claim as they don't have the docs and they even admitted in the cover letter included with the docs that they had sent us everything (meaning they dont have the rest of the contract or a breakdown of the balance among other things).

 

Or do we just bypass them and write straight to the court saying they still haven't provided the docs required to enforce, have admitted they don't have them and request an "Or Else" order with failure to disclose and/or for the claim to be struck out (what is an Or Else order? - is this what I think it is provide the docs or else...) - also does anyone know if there is a general letter/format around that says this that I can edit for the specifics.

 

Thanks.