Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I Know I will get flamed for this , but for once time only I am with MET . The so called  “graffiti” is there to help people , Parent and child bays , Disabled bays , and electric charge point bays are all there for a reason  , just suppose you had an electric car and it was in need of charging ,had children in the car and need extra space to get them out ,had a disabled passenger who needs extra space . how would you feel  if the bay was obstructed . I have no doubt the experts here will guide you to having the parking charge cancelled . But morally ………..
    • I'm afraid that standing on principles almost always involves a bit of risk. I hadn't noticed the case that you have referred to – and our site team member @Andyorch has already commented on it that there is a lottery in so far as judges are concerned. I haven't seen the claim form and I don't know precisely how it was argued in court. I feel very strongly that the decision is wrong because it effectively allows contractual terms to overcome statutory rights – and this has to be in error. Whatever the case, it is most likely that Hermes will simply put their hands up and pay you out and if you had claimed 5 pounds more they would have done the same. Even if they had gone to court, your chances of winning on a claim for the £25 would be better than 95% and the worst you might have expected would have been for the court to refuse to award you the extra 4 pounds and simply to give you the £25. I think that Hermes and the other courier companies rely on the fact that their customers don't have sufficient confidence to refuse to pay for the extra insurance. Clearly this is something which needs to be tested at a reasonably within the court structure but of course this is most unlikely to happen given the value of claims. I was sorry to see that your original reason for not claiming the full value was that   I asked you to post up your claim form. I think it will be helpful if you did that.
    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are 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. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, 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 credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
  • Our picks

Harry May

Default Notice Re-Issue

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1802 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

Thanks again BRW. I've noticed a lot of creditors seem to be taking court action where before they might not have done, or at least have thought twice - Cabot are currently trying to enforce a non-enforceable MBNA agreement for £15,000 (where they get that figure I really don't know). They all seem to be coming out of the woodwork at the moment.

 

Really appreciated your wise words of wisdom and will keep you posted how it goes.

 

Best regards,

 

Magda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just adding this Magda, it might be useful - (maybe not the statute barred bit) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/162456-help-statute-barred-debt.html#post1744862


PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, what is stated is my own opinion and from what I have learnt from this forum and my own experiences.

 

DEBT COLLECTION LETTER/SAR/AGREEMENT TEMPLATES ARE HERE - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?65-legislation

 

IF WE HAVE BEEN HELPFUL -PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE GIVE A DONATION TO HELP US TO CONTINUE HELPING YOU

 

I AM HAPPY TO RECEIVE PM's AND I WILL RESPOND IF I FEEL I CAN ASSIST BUT WHEN YOU DO CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD ON WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO COMMENT - THANK YOU

 

IMPORTANT - If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.

Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Private message facilities are offered for users to communicate issues that are/or could be seen to be inappropriate for posting on the main forum.Site rules explain this in more detail.

If you are approached by private message with a view to asking you to visit another website,please inform the site team via the report icon.

 

Forum rules - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forum-rules-please-read/9-forum-rules-please-read.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks 42man, will have a good read through.

 

regards, Magda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Just curious about something,.when an account has had no activity for many years, a single one off payment accepted, then many years pass and discover the debt hasnt gone away, but was passed to debt agency.

Whats the permitted time for them to issue the new default notice if there has been no activity on account for more than 4 plus years. The present outstanding sum is £130 ....so they say, and default placed on Credit file 26th of april 2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statute of limitation is 6 years, so if you haven't sent any communication acknowledging the debt in the last 6 years, then they cannot enforce.

 

They also cannot enforce if no valid default notice has been issued. If they've already terminated the account, then they cannot 're-issue' a default notice.


If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

 

Me vs Rockwell/Tessara/RBofS: pending.

Me vs MBNA/1st Crud: Discontinued.

First Direct Overdraft: CCJ won.

IR: 2 CCJs 1 won.

Birmingham Midshires: pending

BT: pending

others to come....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cagers,

 

Can someone please confirm that the re-issue of a DN after a wrongful termination is in valid as the contract is no longer live??

 

My solicitor is telling me that even though the claimant issued a Termination notice without a DN, they then corrected the issue by issuing a DN and then a more 'valid' Termination notice therefore they rectified their mistake and I in turn have no case!!

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A creditor can terminate an agreement at any time of their own free will. Nobody can force them to continue with it.

 

HOWEVER if they ever want to see their money back they have to conform to the rules of the CCA.

 

BUT you will have to show that 'a reasonable man' would believe that the account was indeed terminated ( a letter from them saying we have terminated your account is quite a good one)

 

If they also stopped sending statements between termination and new DN that also indicates that they themselves believed the account was no longer 'live'

 

Issuing a DN on a terminated account is absurd as the wording of teh DN itself makes it clear that if the default is rectified then the default would be treated as never having happened - well if you've had to destroy your cards and already refused credit etc etc then again that makes the DN plainly invalid

 

jmho though ....


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks gh... much appreciated!

 

I actually received a Terminatation Notice demanding the remainding sum. Three months later I received a Default Notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi cagers,

 

Can someone please confirm that the re-issue of a DN after a wrongful termination is in valid as the contract is no longer live??

 

My solicitor is telling me that even though the claimant issued a Termination notice without a DN, they then corrected the issue by issuing a DN and then a more 'valid' Termination notice therefore they rectified their mistake and I in turn have no case!!

 

Thanks.

 

Yes he is correct.

 

If the defaqult was not corrctly formated then the orriginal termination was also invalid, thus the ccount was still active, enabling the second default.


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes he is correct.

 

If the defaqult was not corrctly formated then the orriginal termination was also invalid, thus the ccount was still active, enabling the second default.

 

So creditors can now get the default notice wrong or terminate without a default notice as long as they correct the default notice at a later date and re terminate?

Then a faulty DN no longer stands as a defence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there you have the 2 opinions :-)

 

I'd love to see someone take a creditor to Court for terminating an account without a valid DN and not getting their money back - I wonder where the damage would be shown.

 

Just because a law says you can't do something does not mean it cannot be done .....

You MUST NOT exceed the speed limit it is the Law, however you can of your own free will (and perhaps face the consequences) why can't a creditor terminate an agreement??

 

Just because the Law says you cannot do something - does that mean you can just do it and then say ooops because the Law says I can't do it that means I never actually did it??


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Peter - To follow on from this - if a creditor takes you to Court on the back of a faulty DN and loses - are you saying that they could then following the loss at Court - re-issue a valid DN and tehn take action again. After all it would not be another action on the same matter as this time it would be on the back of a valid DN a very different matter.

At what point is an account terminated .....

 

Recently a creditor closed one of my account and wrote of the balance - now, I was in default and they had sent a DN (invalid) so again are you saying that that account is still 'live and kicking' and could be resurrected at any time ....


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi im having some problems myself at the mo and have an invalid default notice, i just wanted to thank you all for some really great advice in this thread, brilliant stuff!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi im having some problems myself at the mo and have an invalid default notice, i just wanted to thank you all for some really great advice in this thread, brilliant stuff!!!!

 

Well it would seem it's not as simple as having an invalid DN anymore, creditors can apparently correct their mistakes!

 

Have you come across this also George??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Peter - To follow on from this - if a creditor takes you to Court on the back of a faulty DN and loses - are you saying that they could then following the loss at Court - re-issue a valid DN and tehn take action again. After all it would not be another action on the same matter as this time it would be on the back of a valid DN a very different matter.

At what point is an account terminated .....

 

Recently a creditor closed one of my account and wrote of the balance - now, I was in default and they had sent a DN (invalid) so again are you saying that that account is still 'live and kicking' and could be resurrected at any time ....

 

In my case, they terminated. Then sent a DN and terminated again. Then sent another DN and Terminated again. I accepted the TN the first time around but they continued the contract then eventually took me to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone please confirm which is the more proven case out of the two options provided above?

I have to decide if I am to have my case set aside (as the court went ahead without notice the first time) but I don't want to challenge a case that may now be deemed pointless if the claimants can rectify an unlawful termination with a second DN and termination and a third DN and termination when the first termination was accepted by me.

Many thanks for your help!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all I now have the same problem i have an account that was terminated with no DN, which i accepted and this was then folled by a DN and another termination.

All the advice so far has been that a terminated account is just that, and if the creditor then tries to rectify by further issuind a dn and tn then this is not allowed.the wording of the act ould suggest this is the case.

although the creditor has not started action , even tho ive made no payments since sept 2008, i keep getting threat o grams but if they do issue a claim i need to also know if the defence is valid!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a solicitor a year ago, informed him of the DN sent after the unlawful termination and he agreed to represent me. I then received a judgment for delivery of good and full payment forthwith to which I didn't understand. The solicitor told me it had gone to court without us so he would get it set aside but in the mean time he needed answers from the claimant to proceed.

They never responded so he left it, stating he presumes they have left it. In deed they hadn't.

A year later they present my solicitor withthe DN sent after the termination and appartent my chances are now unlikely to succeed. Thats after a year of interest accued on the sum and solicitor fees mind :-x

He has said he will still apply for the case to be set aside if I so want but it will be further costs.

I don't know what to do now :???:

I have a month before the charging order hearing too! :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well imho your solicitor isn't much cop allowing it to go to Court without you and letting them get away with adding post judgement interest which isn't allowed on CCA cases either.

 

Both arguments have been used. BUT neither has been appealed therefore AFAIK there is no binding precedent.

 

IMHO it has all depended on a) how well the defendant's case was put and b) the Judge's lottery (although again IMHO I would put far more on point a than b)

 

There was a recent case in CC where the claimant put forward PB's stance as a proposed solution having lost because of a faulty DN and the DJ dismissed it out of hand. Not because of bringing a 2nd case but because the agreement was terminated. I'll try and dig it out.

 

Why not put my argument to your solicitor and ask them to explain .....


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry please excuse my ignorance but what is PB's stance??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also are you saying post judgment interest isn't allowed on CCA cases? They are adding 2% every month in my case!

The thing with my solicitor is that he specialises in these case however and there is a big however, he defends a lot of creditors. I'm concerned, and this is without prejudice, that they are not acting in my best interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2% - Ok, so they are claiming contractual interest. Is there a provision for that in the agreement?

 

PB = PeterBard

 

If your solicitor normally works for the creditors then and again this is just my opinion - it may be that they have not fully explored the other 'side of the coin' ....

 

As I said earlier, IMHO a creditor can terminate an account at any time.

The debtor would then theoretically have a case against them for breach of contract - however showing damage having taken their money would be difficult.

 

The CCA does not stop them doing a thing they are not allowed to do - the Law says you should keep your side of teh agreement too. When you stop repaying and you are not allowed to - does that mean that because you weren't allowed to that, in fact, it didn't happen ? .....

 

Also check out S98A(3) from teh new EU Directive

 

(3) Where a regulated open-end consumer credit agreement, other than an excluded

agreement, provides for termination of the agreement by the creditor—

(a) the termination must be by notice served on the debtor, and

(b) the termination may not take effect until after the end of the period of two months,

or such longer period as the agreement may provide, beginning with the day after

the day on which notice is served.

 

You will also notice that many credit agreement will have a clause stating that the creditor can terminate at any time. Now having signed the agreement - again you accepted that clause - (although you could have refused to accept it as unfair at the time)


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there is provisions for contractual interest.

I totally get your point on the not happening question... how can a DN be served on an already terminated agreement! It's absurd.

If I punched someone and got arrested for assault, I couldn't then return to the time of impact and say ok 'hit me first' then claim I hit the person through self defence because I'd made a mistake, right!!

 

Yes the contract does state the creditor can terminate at any time but only once the payments are missed and the CCA process is followed.

 

I fear that my solicitor does not want me to win. You may say why haven't you jumped ship, well because he has been telling me it's all in my best interest but he has let this whole case spiral out of control to the point where I am worse off.

 

If I feel I have a case to defend I will pay the fees to have this set aside and take the risk but I need to gather all my evidence before I do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor is also telling me it is more than likely a set aside application will be unsuccessful due to them having a DN after the termination. Is this case? Surely a DJ would give me the option to defend my case with good grounds?

I would have had the decision set aside immediately and have email proof of me requesting this of my solicitor who said timing was not an issue as it is them delaying the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, you are probably best off, starting your own thread, and post the whole story there. Post a link to it in this thread so that everyone who wants to can follow

 

There may be other issue as well that have been missed.


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

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...