Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
    • Peter Levy says he received a call from someone pretending to be from his bank in February.View the full article
    • Peter Levy says he received a call from someone pretending to be from his bank in February.View the full article
  • 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

The Four Corner Rule


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5596 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

hi everyone. my first post here after finding this excellent DB. im currently studying the freeman philosophy and commercial law as way to beat fraudulent money lenders.

 

one thing i discovered is this:

 

The term is ordinarily included in the phrase within the four corners of the document, which denotes that in ascertaining the legal significance and consequences of the document, the parties and the court can only examine its language and all matters encompassed within it. Extraneous information concerning the document that does not appear in it—within its four corners—cannot be evaluated.

 

Four Corners legal definition

 

so anything that is not in the four corners of the document has no effect on it.

 

if a box is put onto the document, a new 'four corners' is created. it follows that anything inside that box has no effect on the language outside of it and vice versa.

 

most CC agreements i have seen contain a signature box. if you sign within the box, you agree to the terms within the box, not on the whole document. if there were no terms in the box where you signed and there is no signature of the bank rep in the box, then there cant be an agreement.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only flaw to your argument is that you are citing American Law, Not UK law.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only flaw to your argument is that you are citing American Law, Not UK law.

 

it's commercial law, merchant law, admiralty law (whatever you want to call it). it applies here just as much as it does in the US, hence why a bank in england would put a box around the signature on there documents. if there was no need for a box, why put it on? there's a need, but im not 100% sure why.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, what a shame.

 

Keep at it pleasuredome, I'm sure you'll find lots more to hit them with:)

 

only bullets can stop me now ;-)

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt Collection Agency

 

thanks.

 

does anyone on here have a DCA demanding money from them? if so, do they have a contract with the DCA?

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 3 DCAs demanding money. I don't have a contract with any of them.

Capquest - No cca yet - OC sent what they think is a CCA - account on hold - no contact since

 

Lewis - Lost their tongue after cca request:roll: -

Now in default of my CCA request - still no contact since:D

 

Fredrickson - No cca yet - Now in default of my request - now stopped contact with me:rolleyes: **UPDATE** April - Sent back £1 p/o and gave up!!!!!!!!!!

 

1ST Credit - CCA request sent - now stopped contact with me

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 3 DCAs demanding money. I don't have a contract with any of them.

 

here's something called a notice of discharge. you can use this for parking tickets, speed camera fines etc.

 

when someone sends you a notice saying that you owe them something, it is an offer. you cannot refuse their offer. to do so will put you in dishonour. ignoring it is agreement by aquiesence. you have to accept conditionally, which is a counter-offer. if they do not respond to your offer the original is void.

 

this is basically how its done (this is for a parking ticket, you can alter this to suit you circumstances. but do a bit of research first so you understand what you are doing. you can change proof of claims to 'proof of claim that a contract exists between [YOUR NAME] and [their company name]):

 

[ADDRESS]

 

 

[DATE]

 

Re: FIXED PENALTY NOTICE AB12345678 - Issued [date]

 

Notice of Discharge of Outstanding Penalty Notice and Request for Clarification.

 

To [address]

 

You have apparently made allegations of illegal conduct against me.

You have apparently made demands upon me.

I do not understand those apparent demands and therefore cannot lawfully fulfil them.

I seek clarification of your document so that I may act according to the law and maintain my entire body of God given Natural Rights.

Failure to accept this offer to clarify and to do so completely and in good faith within 10 days will be deemed by all parties to mean you and your principal or other parties abandon all demands upon me.

 

I conditionally accept your offer to agree that I am [NAME] and that I owe £......., upon proof of claim of all of the following:

 

1. Upon proof of claim that I am a person and not a human being.

2. Upon proof of claim that you know what a ‘person’ actually is, legally speaking.

3. Upon proof of claim that you know what the difference between a ‘human being’ and a ‘person’ actually is, legally speaking.

4. Upon proof of claim that I am NAME[all capitals] and not Name[upper and lower case]

5. Upon proof of claim that the charge was the result of a lawful investigation unmarred by prejudice.

6. Upon proof of claim that I am a member of the society whose statutes and subsisting regulations you are enforcing.

7. Upon proof of claim that I showed you some sort of identification.

8 Upon proof of claim that there is a nameable society that I belong to and that the laws covered within this alleged transgression state that they apply to me within that named society

 

Answers to these questions must be under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and received via registered mail to:

 

[ADDRESS]

 

no later than TEN (10) days from the date of original service as dated by way of Royal Mail

recorded delivery service. Further Notices issued or demands for payment thereafter by you or any third parties will be seen as a breach of Section 1 of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 if you fall into dishonour by failing to respond within the ten days.

 

 

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity

[signature]

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that gets you off a parking ticket I will be absolutely amazed.

 

it is the biggest crock I have ever seen and would immediately be binned

Their FPN is not an offer.... it is a penalty notice under statute and anyone that attempts to use this is most likely at the very least to lose their opportunity to pay the reduced amount and if they use it against a speed camera offence will end up in breach of s172 of the road traffic act and 6 point on their license.

 

I love the way you spout rubbish about "statutes not being law" and then quote the protection from harassment act .

 

You cannot have it both ways - either acts of parliament are laws or they are not. You cannot decry the laws as invalid and then expect to use them in your defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their FPN is not an offer....

 

yes it is.

 

I love the way you spout rubbish about "statutes not being law" and then quote the protection from harassment act .

 

You cannot have it both ways - either acts of parliament are laws or they are not. You cannot decry the laws as invalid and then expect to use them in your defence.

 

let me try to enable understanding for you. statute is not law unless you contract to it. all corporations are governed by statute law (they cannot get out of it), a human being is not. hence why you can use a statute against a corporation. this is why a policeman needs evidence of the person for a breach of any statute, because the person (your name in capital letters) is a corporation. if a common law is broken then the policeman does not require evidence of the person.

 

the courts, police forces, fire brigades, hospitals, the government, the councils, social services, are all corporations and can be found listed in databases such as Dunn & Bradstreet, creditgate.com etc

 

there are people who have used these types of notices of discharge successfully and corporations cannot get around them.

 

there is plenty of information on the web, examples and cases where people are using this avenue re-claim back their common law rights.

 

some sites to go to are:

 

www.tpuc.org | News for positive people

Think Free Be Free - Welcome to ThinkFree.ca

 

some videos:

 

Think Free : Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception

 

DemockeryWEB.mov

 

 

you can shout and scream 'rubbish' as much as you want. its just information and you can make of it what you will. i realise this route isnt for everyone. im not trying to convince anyone that this is ultimate truth and the only way, all im saying is it is an avenue that people can try if they want to. i didnt join this DB to argue over opinions and who's right and who's wrong, or try to get personal with people. all im here for is to share info.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

statute is not law unless you contract to it

You just cannot "opt out" of the law. you do not contract to it - it is not an optional extra - it is THE LAW.

 

there are holes in it no doubt - some big enough to drive busses through but the premise that you, as an individual can declare yourself to be a "freeman" and therefore not subject to statutory law is lunacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You just cannot "opt out" of the law. you do not contract to it - it is not an optional extra - it is THE LAW.

 

there are holes in it no doubt - some big enough to drive busses through but the premise that you, as an individual can declare yourself to be a "freeman" and therefore not subject to statutory law is lunacy.

 

then i can only say that 'lunacy' is working for people using it, not just in this country, but those countries England gave the common law to.

 

finding loopholes is an area that is very legit and i applaud all who use that method, hence i why i started this thread. imo, the signature box is a loophole that probably could never be filled.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do hope that the letter template you showed doesn't allow somebody driving at 130mph in a 30mph limit to be let off:eek:

 

I replied on post 13# because you asked if anybody had DCAs demanding money and if the person being demanded of had a contract with those DCAs. I'm still not sure how the letter would apply for dca's? Is there a different one that deals directly with DCA's and the issue of no contract with them?

 

Many thanks

Happyfeet:)

Capquest - No cca yet - OC sent what they think is a CCA - account on hold - no contact since

 

Lewis - Lost their tongue after cca request:roll: -

Now in default of my CCA request - still no contact since:D

 

Fredrickson - No cca yet - Now in default of my request - now stopped contact with me:rolleyes: **UPDATE** April - Sent back £1 p/o and gave up!!!!!!!!!!

 

1ST Credit - CCA request sent - now stopped contact with me

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do hope that the letter template you showed doesn't allow somebody driving at 130mph in a 30mph limit to be let off:eek:

 

I replied on post 13# because you asked if anybody had DCAs demanding money and if the person being demanded of had a contract with those DCAs. I'm still not sure how the letter would apply for dca's? Is there a different one that deals directly with DCA's and the issue of no contract with them?

 

Many thanks

Happyfeet:)

 

ok. lets see if we can use our creative imagination to come up with notice that you can send them.

 

 

[ADDRESS]

 

 

[DATE]

 

Re: NOTICE (ok here put in the title of the notice they sent you, demand for payment etc) - Issued [date]

 

Notice of Discharge of... (Demand of Payment)

 

To [address]

 

You have apparently made allegations of that I owe you money. You have apparently made demands upon me to pay the money allegedly owed. I do not understand those apparent demands and therefore cannot lawfully fulfil them.

 

I seek clarification of your document so that I may act according to the law.

 

Failure to accept this offer to clarify and to do so completely and in good faith within 10 days will be deemed by all parties to mean you and your principal or other parties abandon all demands upon me.

 

I conditionally accept your offer to agree that I am [your NAME in capitals] and that I owe £......., upon proof of claim that there exists a signed two party contract between us, and that if you can prove that said contract exists, you make presentation of a bill of exchange for the aforementioned amount.

 

Proof and presentation must be sent via registered mail to:

 

[ADDRESS]

 

no later than TEN (10) days from the date of original service as dated by way of Royal Mail

recorded delivery service. Further demands for payment thereafter by you or any third parties will be seen as a breach of Section 1 of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 if you fall into dishonour by failing to respond within the ten days.

 

 

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity

[signature]

 

 

so basically, its quite simple. all you are doing is disharging their offer for you to pay them by making a counter-offer to pay on condition. its just negotiation, which any judge will have assumed to have been undertaken by the 2 parties before entering court.

 

DCA's have no contracts with the persons they demand money from and cannot enforce those demands if you conditionally accept.

 

if you receive no reply, you can then go to a public notary and get him to send a copy of your notice with his own. if that is ignored, the PN will send the same one last time. if it ignored again, the PN will make a default judgment in your favour, an estoppel.

 

if the DCA take you to court, you can file the estoppel into the evidence file of the judge, and it all goes tits up for the DCA

Edited by pleasuredome

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

so let me get this straight - at what point would you send this letter? would it be when you first get the demand to know who was driving or have you, at this point already confirmed to the police who was driving?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so let me get this straight - at what point would you send this letter? would it be when you first get the demand to know who was driving or have you, at this point already confirmed to the police who was driving?

 

the one above is to be sent to the DCA.

 

that particular situation, and with other driving offences could be very difficult to get out of as the car is registered in your person. you could claim that you dont know who was driving, which would mean they would try to get you to pay the fine. at that point you would send that notice.

 

a funny story that a policeman told my bro-in-law was that, to put it in a nutshell, the police went chasing after 3 lads in a car, the car had gained some distance on police, but the police eventually caught them when the car had stopped. they went to the car and all three lads were sat on the backseat. the police asked who was driving and they said they didnt know, none of them gave their name and there was nothing the police could do.

 

im not condoning irresponsible behaviour, but these days the 'authorities' are acting that way all the time and are screwing the people for as much as they can get.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you, by any chance, supply the defence in the Rankine Case?

  • Haha 1

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

the police went chasing after 3 lads in a car, the car had gained some distance on police, but the police eventually caught them when the car had stopped. they went to the car and all three lads were sat on the backseat. the police asked who was driving and they said they didnt know, none of them gave their name and there was nothing the police could do.

 

in the case of a s172 notice - the registered keeper is REQUIRED BY LAW to give the name of the driver. if they fail to do so they themselves are prosecuted for failing to do so.

 

when this process was challenged under the Human rights act the EU court held that simply by DRIVING A CAR the driver agreed to forfeit some of their rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5596 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...