Default Notice Re-Issue

[chez262]

Thanks PB, a lot of what you say above is slightly confusing to little old me I have to admit

My opinion is based purely on my very small knowledge, I have no experience or links to anyone with such experience and therefore your opinion and advice is valued!

 

I have to agree, a typo is a minor technicality for the courts to actually make the decision that the agreement is therefore unenforeable however, if the debtor is not provided with the necessities that is afforded to them then surely this represents a prejudice issue? My case for instance does not involve a typo on a DN, no DN was present at all and there is a termination that resulted from this prejudice business error made by the creditor. So what reasons are DJ's giving of late for allowing another DN to be issued on an agreement that a reasonable person would deem none existent?

Lets say after a default on an account the creditor recovers the goods... No DN and no TN. This is the same senario only using a different entitlement afforded to a creditor after a valid DN.

Can the creditor return the goods, then issue a DN and a TN for the agreement to become capable of enforcement? To a reasonable person, if the goods were recovered or a TN was received either way one would believe the agreement is over and that the creditor no longer wants it to continue.

What I'm trying to fathom is what reasons for a failed defence is the DJ likely to return based on other cases?

 

Thanks

C

[Peterbard]

Any update

[chez262]

Ignore post

Edited February 23, 2011 by chez262

[griffin036]

Returning to this subject once again and the original post :

" If a default notice is invalid due to penalty charges or overstated amount or not allowing 14 days to remedy breach should that be enough to strike out their claim. And if so can the claimant then re-issue a new default notice correcting the wrongly stated items, even if this is two years later!"

I find myself in the same situation, HOWEVER, the o/c has reissued ( reprinted/conjured up/edited ) a default notice with exactly the same dates as the original ( 2009) but this time asking for the arrears and not the whole balance to be repaid. Surely this amounts to fraud and deception, as the original DN was defective they now have tried to correct their mistake. Account terminated and assigned during the default notice period to rectify in any case. Current dca is now asking for proposals to repay on the strength of this altered dn, how should I respond?

[Undercover-Elsa]

In that case it's still a bad DN, Griffin. As they issued it retrospectively it's obviously impossible to remedy by the given date.

Staple it to the envelope it arrived in, noting date of receipt and sit on it (and the original) in case they take you to court.

[griffin036]

The latest DN was sent by the current chasing DCA who had asked for a copy of the DN from the OC. To all extents and purposes this DN now looks compliant, however it is not the same as the one I originally recieved.

It seems that certain american bank who issued loads of dn's like mine asking for the full balance, are now trying to put right their mistake. Convincing the DCA that they are still in the wrong maybe a different story!

[dpac123]

I'm also struggling to figure out if I have a defence or not. NatWest defaulted a loan in 2012 and we went to court, but the DN was defective (amount wrong, less than 14 days to resolve). The judge struck it out and as if by magic, a new default notice arrived in April 2013. It all seems to be correct but there is the small matter that the agreement was in effect, terminated when court action took place. Also, my access to the linked bank account/loan was unilaterally terminated in 2009 with no notice when arrears first started.

 

 

I have a trial date in 3 weeks time and keep finding conflicting information so I don't know if it can be successfully defended on this basis or not. Please advice, thanks

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336532-RBS-taking-me-to-court-*Struck-Out*-**-New-claim-issued-by-RBS-**/page18

Edited December 30, 2014 by Andyorch
Posters link added

[ScarletPimpernel]

I'm also struggling to figure out if I have a defence or not. NatWest defaulted a loan in 2012 and we went to court, but the DN was defective (amount wrong, less than 14 days to resolve). The judge struck it out and as if by magic, a new default notice arrived in April 2013. It all seems to be correct but there is the small matter that the agreement was in effect, terminated when court action took place. Also, my access to the linked bank account/loan was unilaterally terminated in 2009 with no notice when arrears first started.

 

 

I have a trial date in 3 weeks time and keep finding conflicting information so I don't know if it can be successfully defended on this basis or not. Please advice, thanks

 

Please start a new thread for your case.