Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. 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 of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Help needed with ford credit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5568 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 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It may be that the only way of resolving this may be in court....a Subject Access Request might be a good idea (and specifically ask for all copies of default notices !!).....the letter is dated 30th January and they are asking you to refer to the default notice which expired on the 3rd February (obviously one that you didn't receive !!! AND which they hadn't printed yet by the looks of things!!) I think they could possibly have screwed up big time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks 42man

 

Please could you give me some direction on which way to go with this, because they are being very difficult and rude on the phone.

 

What would the court make of the above letters?

 

An SAR might not be complied with before court, by the way they are dealing with me.

 

your help is much appreciated on this, as i have to answer their threats of court at some time.

 

Thanks GG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks SP

 

The first is the letter thats states about the first DN that wasnt received.

the other 2 are the 2nd DN. Thanks for your help. GG

 

FORDLETTER.jpg

 

fordDN.jpg

 

FORDDN2NDPG.jpg

 

 

Are the arrears quoted and the other figures on th DN which you have blacked out accurate?

 

Can you scan your actual agreement up?

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again josie

 

in the first letter they did state that a default notice had already been served in jan, are they right to issue another 3 days after the first one expired?

 

Here is the agreement and terms.

 

GG

 

Fordagreementpg1.jpg

 

Fordagreementpg2.jpg

 

Fordagreementpg3.jpg

 

Fordagreementpg4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks 42 man

 

Yes ive read that a few times and although i know its similar to mine im not clever enough to work out what's wrong with the DN'S and what to do next. I dont think ford's will do anything more until the 2nd DN run's out but i'd like to know what i have on my side, to put up a defence.

 

Please when you get a min if you could point out what to do next.

 

Thanks GG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi GG, had a read through your thread and can't really add anything to what's already been posted; I too would think that the £25 letter fees are penalty charges, rendering the arrears sums incorrect.

 

Think your best bet might be to PM X20 or PT. Alternatively, if they are too busy, could you seek legal advice? As you are temporarily on benefits I should think you might be able to get legal aid. If not, most solicitors give a 30 minute intial interview for free - might be enough to give you a clearer idea as to where you stand.

 

Best of luck to you:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think they could issue two DN's on the same account?

 

It also begs the question, if they are refusing your offer and telling you to pay up by the end of the first DN on the 3rd, why then allow you another 20 odd days by issuing a second one? Surely the best for them would be to just terminate and claim the lot?

 

Have you SAR'd them yet? I think this is imperative if you haven't, as I agree that it looks like they're playing silly beggers with you.

 

Also, you could try pm'ing banker_rhymes_with to have a look at your thread - he's pretty good with defaults.

Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

YW

 

The other thing that springs to mind is that it could be worth checking it's set out correctly etc.

 

If you have a look in the statutes library, in the link that is for CCA1974 and related docs, the defaults bit is there. They may have screwed up on the form, you never know...

Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, DNs are not my particular area of expertise but from what I do know, the DN in post #21 looks valid, as does the HP agreement.

 

However, if the first DN that you didn't recieve was the same as the (puported) second one, then under 3a) they terminated the agreement on 3 February and therefore the second DN is invalid 'cos you can't default an account that is closed.

 

So

 

a) they never sent the first DN and the second is therefore the first (if you see what I mean :rolleyes:) and it is valid

 

OR

 

b) they did send the first DN which was presumably valid but the second is unlawful

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...