Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

zhanzhibar vs Link financial ***WON***


zhanzhibar
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5247 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hiya all,

 

Does anybody know how to do a statement of case summary?

 

The order from the court onlyu stated that the Claimangt need to do it (I haven't seen it though) but i thought just in case, i better do one too but don't know how to start. Help please....

 

Sorry. I got more question relating to NOA.

 

What is the consequence of not complying to S136 & S196 of the Law of Property Act ?

 

 

Help anybody with these 2 queries please...

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 -Perfection of the assignment.

 

2.1. I have never received a notice of assignment according in all respects with s136 of the Law of Property Act 1925

 

2.2 I respectfully submit to the court that steps to ensure service of a notice of assignment are only adequate if the requirements of s196 of the law of property act 1925 are complied with regard to either (a) personal service or (b) postal service.

 

2.3 Since the claimant explicitly states the notice was “sent” it is assumed that this was done via the postal service.

 

The requirements for service via the post are

 

Law Of Property Act (1925) s196

.

Regulations respecting notices.

 

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

 

3.2 - It is noted that the claimant has, at no time, provided evidence that the notice of assignment was sent via registered post, and if “sent” via any other method, the notice was not sufficiently served

 

3.3 -. I did not receive any notice of assignment in the format prescribed by law and served in the prescribed manner from the respondent, and I have asked the other members of my family if they signed for such a document; they have assured me that they did not.

 

3.4 - To the best of my knowledge, any notice of assignment sent by registered post must, therefore have been returned to the respondent.

 

3.5 - Consequently, I do not believe that any notice of assignment was properly served upon me at the date of the claim, and therefore any assignment has not been perfected in law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Law Of Property - s136 Legal assignments of things in action

(1) Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice-

(a) the legal right to such debt or thing in action;

(b) all legal and other remedies for the same; and

© the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor:

Provided that, if the debtor, trustee or other person liable in respect of such debt or thing in action has notice-

(a) that the assignment is disputed by the assignor or any person claiming under him; or

(b) of any other opposing or conflicting claims to such debt or thing in action;

he may, if he thinks fit, either call upon the persons making claim thereto to interplead concerning the same, or pay the debt or other thing in action into court under the provisions of the Trustee Act, 1925

Rights and Duties

CCA74 s189(1)

“ creditor “ means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or

the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by

assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit

agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

Link to post
Share on other sites

Help anybody with these 2 queries please...

Zhan you have mail:wink:

 

Non compliance with the LOP means that the assignment is equitable only, if the notice of assignment itself is defective then the assignment is bad and the case cannot continue as the DCA does not have sufficient standing on their own.

 

If the assignment falls into equity then the DCA needs the original creditor to sue you

 

there is case law on defective assignments by misstated terms, the leading case is Harrison and Burke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zhan you have mail:wink:

Thanks for both cases Paul

 

Non compliance with the LOP means that the assignment is equitable only, if the notice of assignment itself is defective then the assignment is bad and the case cannot continue as the DCA does not have sufficient standing on their own.

If the assignment falls into equity then the DCA needs the original creditor to sue you

 

1) What does "equitable" mean?

2) Is there a standard format of how a NOA should look like & therefore non-compliance of NOA to this format should make it defective?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no.. I am in panic mode now. Just called the court & asked if they have submitted a case summary & the court said that yes AL filed it on the 26th March.

I told the lady from the court that I didn't receive a copy eventhough its there in the order that it need to be filed & served which from what Steven said in earlier post that by served means they have to send it to me too.

 

What do i do now as i do not know what is in there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for both cases Paul

 

 

 

1) What does "equitable" mean?

2) Is there a standard format of how a NOA should look like & therefore non-compliance of NOA to this format should make it defective?

 

Oh no.. I am in panic mode now. Just called the court & asked if they have submitted a case summary & the court said that yes AL filed it on the 26th March.

I told the lady from the court that I didn't receive a copy eventhough its there in the order that it need to be filed & served which from what Steven said in earlier post that by served means they have to send it to me too.

 

What do i do now as i do not know what is in there?

 

 

Sorry about this but URGENt advice is needed for the queries above. Got the CMC at 3 this afternoon & I am a bit panicky now that they have sent sthg I have not seen:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I can only say what has happened with myself and others who have dealt with Link but they should be a push over when you stick to the lack of NoA. I have recently won against Link although the debt is going back to original creditor. They too filed stuff late and I never saw it until the morning of the hearing. The Judge was not happy with the solicitor for this so it was adjourned to allow me time to look through the new stuff they filed. Costs were reserved, in fact he said I wouldn't be liable as they hadn't sent the information.

 

I can only say yes it is highly stressful but you look like you are in the same position so just keep re-enforcing the lack of NoA. Without it they have no chance.

 

But then there maybe this to look forward to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/191761-link-debt-sold-back.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this from Link? If so you should recieve this 14 days before the hearing to allow you time to respond. The Judge should look badly upon this from the solicitors and adjourn the hearing. This is unfair and I guess the phrase is vexatious to the defendant.

 

I can only speak personally and not professionally as I have relied on help from the boffins here.

 

I also know what those butterflies are like...dry mouth too!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya all,

 

Sorry for being a bit late in telling the tale of my court appearance today. I think I am just feeling a bit drain & perplexed by what's just happened today & last Wednesday.

 

As I have never been to a case management conference before, I was preparing myself just in case I got DDJ Joseph again (who dealt with my Amex case last Wednesday & had a go at me :( for moral issue & also not recognising that AMex DN is invalid hence agreement unenforceable!).

 

Anyway, arrived early at the court & a Mr Park is acting as Asset Link agent came to see me & said he hasn't got much detailed on the case. He asked when the claim started etc..etc... he seem quite nice so i told him. He did say that the claimant agreed for the case to be in small claim which what i want. I said I am not happy that I only got the case summary 2 hours ago. He said take it to the judge.

 

3 pm came & we went in. I give a letter of apology from OH to the DDJ Downturn (quite a nice guy compared to DDJ Joseph) as OH can't attend the hearing. As it is a case management conference he said is there anything I want to say?

 

Welll I grab the opportunity this time by saying that in the case summary, the Claimant said they have provided me with Notice of Assignment. I said I deny that the Notice of Assignment as required by s136 of the LOP has been received .I said to the judge under S136, the assignor need to send me the a Notice Of Assignment & what the Claimant send is not a NOA. I showed the judge & the agent an extract of the S136 & S196 as attached here. I also showed him the "NOA" that the Claimant said they have given to me. The judge had a read of the extract & then said he can't see where it says in that extract that the assignor has to give the NOA so he said what the Claimant has given is OK & that I am not going to go anywhere with this. Welll! there goes my 1st point of defense...I was really shocked that he did not consider that s136 is relevant to determine that the assignment is not compliance to LOP.

 

May be I didn't say it the right way lawyers will do & hence got a bit stuck there. I then said if what the claimant said is a NOA then they should have send it registered to me as stated under s196 to which the judge said he will have to have to look into that as he doesn't know.

 

I then went to my next point about the need of the Notice of Cancellation right as part of the agreement. I quote Moorhouse Services V kabir 1995. He accepted what i said but he didn't ask the agent to submit a Notice of cancellation rights to me.:confused:

 

I also complain to the judge that the Claimant has twice not comply to the court Order. One being late in submitting their AQ & then not serving me the case summary until 2 hour ago !

 

After all that, the judge said that I should do an amended defense & asked me how long it will take me to do an amended defense? Bearing in mind I have Amex amended defensed to submit by the 8th, i said 28 days.

 

So the judge said that i should file & serve an amended defense by 4 pm 27th April and then by 26th May both parties to submit a witness statement, all documents and any law case to be relied upon.

 

He admitted that he is not prepared for me to bring up law cases and argue the points in the case summary. He said that whatever i said here can be included in the amended defense although he kinda said that to him the NOA s136 did not carry much wieght.

 

He did comment on my knowledge of the law & all i said I learn it from websites...perhaps where i live they don't know yet about this special website:wink:

 

There goes folks. I am beginning to feel that I might not be able to convince the court that the Claimant did not has the right to sue me & that the agreement is unenforceable due to lack of notice of cancellation rights even though Moorhouse Services V Kabir specifically said so.

 

Zhan

Notice of Assignment s136.doc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok it's not a brilliant result. I went 3 times before it was finally discontinued.

 

But keep your hopes up as that lack of NoA is crucial. I am sure Paul or others will help more. Also cancellation rights are another one. This was my fall back and the Judge acknowledged that.

 

It seems some Judges just don't seem to read what is given to them properly. I'm in Plymouth and I thought we were behind the rest of the country but the 2 judges I had were pretty good and seemed to despise DCA's, lol!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya all,

 

 

 

Welll I grab the opportunity this time by saying that in the case summary, the Claimant said they have provided me with Notice of Assignment. I said I deny that the Notice of Assignment as required by s136 of the LOP has been received .I said to the judge under S136, the assignor need to send me the a Notice Of Assignment & what the Claimant send is not a NOA. I showed the judge & the agent an extract of the S136 & S196 as attached here. I also showed him the "NOA" that the Claimant said they have given to me. The judge had a read of the extract & then said he can't see where it says in that extract that the assignor has to give the NOA so he said what the Claimant has given is OK & that I am not going to go anywhere with this. Welll! there goes my 1st point of defense...I was really shocked that he did not consider that s136 is relevant to determine that the assignment is not compliance to LOP.

 

 

 

If you think this is bad look at this Micheal Jackson Bad

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/130101-humbleman-hfc-weightmans-court-8.html#post2040923

Link to post
Share on other sites

This DDJ is wrong - s.136 says a NoA should be sent, although it doesn't say who should send it admittedley, but that doesn't mean they get away without one.

 

I can't believe he didn't order them to disclose it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Welll I grab the opportunity this time by saying that in the case summary, the Claimant said they have provided me with Notice of Assignment. I said I deny that the Notice of Assignment as required by s136 of the LOP has been received .I said to the judge under S136, the assignor need to send me the a Notice Of Assignment & what the Claimant send is not a NOA. I showed the judge & the agent an extract of the S136 & S196 as attached here. I also showed him the "NOA" that the Claimant said they have given to me. The judge had a read of the extract & then said he can't see where it says in that extract that the assignor has to give the NOA so he said what the Claimant has given is OK & that I am not going to go anywhere with this. Welll! there goes my 1st point of defense...I was really shocked that he did not consider that s136 is relevant to determine that the assignment is not compliance to LOP.

 

May be I didn't say it the right way lawyers will do & hence got a bit stuck there. I then said if what the claimant said is a NOA then they should have send it registered to me as stated under s196 to which the judge said he will have to have to look into that as he doesn't know.

 

This DDJ is wrong - s.136 says a NoA should be sent, although it doesn't say who should send it admittedley, but that doesn't mean they get away without one.

 

I can't believe he didn't order them to disclose it.

 

 

Hi all,

 

Have been preparing my amended defense for this case. My key points initially were:

1) NOA not send by assignor under S136 of LOP

2) NOA not send via registered post under LOP (can't remember what section)

3) No notice of cancellation (moorhouse services V kabir 1995 CA)

 

Since DDJ Downturn has squashed my 1st point by saying that s136 does not say that the assignor has to send the NOA .... I am on a very very thin ice here. The only other major defense I got is the Notice of cancellation.

 

I am a bit concerned that I can't argue this case strongly & would really appreciate any help whatsoever.

 

I need some more backup about s136 & how they are not entitled to this debt but I don't know how to go about arguing this. Paul (pt2357) has kindly give me a case

W F Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke and another

but i don't know how to use it........any help much appreciated please.

thanks

 

zhan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Having read a lot of threads & posts regarding Notice of ssignments & deed of assignment last night, i went & check all my papers with Link.

 

Now here's what I've just discovered having ploughed through all those paperworks with Links last night.

 

It looked like I have received 2 Notice of assignment from Link:

 

1) dated 29th August 2007 with no stated balance (this is also the copy they included in their AQ & also what they sent to me in reply to my defence)

 

2) dated 6th October 2008 with balance statedat £5173( which included in that balance a couple of hundred of charges)

 

 

Here's my questions, if somebody could help with these:

 

a) Would these NOA with different dates make any difference and can help me with my amended defense?

Having read the case W F Harrison & Co Ltd V burke and another 1956 All ER 169, looks like date on NOA does matter & would be invalid if it is earlier than the DOA. Now since I don't have the DOA to ensure that the date of NOA was sent after the DOA date, what do I do? Can I ask this in my amended defense? Have i got the right to ask this info as i believe (having read some posts here) that there is no legal requirement for them to provide me with one even though i did ask it in my AQ. However, saying that, can somebody confirm that since I sent a CPR31.14 request then therefore they have to provide me a copy of the DOA for me to get my defence properly.

 

b) Since Link themselves submitted to the court in their AQ the copy of the NOA dated 29th August 2007 i.e the one without the balance stated, does this mean that the NOA is inaccurate under S136 (1) of the LOP as stated by Denning LJ in his judgement in W F Harrison & Co Ltd V burke and another 1956 All ER 169? What do you all think?

 

c) As stated above the balance of £5173.20 include a couple of hundred pounds of charges (£290 to be exact although there is another £75 acceptance fee that was stated in the agreement that I didn't include in the £290). Again, having read some posts last night, am I right in thinking that if there is some charges that is deemed to be invalid (how do I prove this?I did ask the justification of the charges in the AQ but got no reply) included in the amount stated in the NOA, then the NOA is invalid.

If this is the case, Can somebody tell me which regs or Act does this come from?

 

 

Help please ...anybody?

 

Zhan

 

 

 

 

 

 

CCF17042009_00000-1-1.jpg

 

 

CCF04122008_00000-1.jpg

Edited by zhanzhibar
delete account at the top of the letter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but I got another question. In both letters above it stated that the assignment was for "the benefit" of the debt. What does this mean?

 

I read somewhere last night that it means that it is only the equitable assignment/debt (not sure which one is the correct one to use ) that was transferred to and not the absolute assignment and if that is the case then they can't ake me to court. Is this right?

 

Also, how can one know when one is served with a NOA which was an absolute assignment?

 

Can anybody help please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...