Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • please dont use hosting sites. copied and attached as per our upload guide. dx  
    • Another update - just had another round of Text messages, Emails and letters. Physical  letters still going to the old address (forwarded by royal mail). All messages were exactly the same as the previous round with threats of CCj's, Attachment of Earnings, Warrant of Execution, Bankruptcy and Charging Order. Seems to be a 2 week pattern of 1 week letter, following week email - texts seem to be a bit more randon, but always over 10 days between each one.  Not sure if IDR are working diligently behind the scenes to recover monies from me,  or are just spamming me in the hope that i stick my head above the parapet
    • Here  (edited for personal information).    Claimform.pdf filed defence.pdf
    • 1. the claim is for sum of 1650£ due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for capital one account with an account reference of xxxx 2. the dependent failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s87(1) of the consumer credit act 1973 which has not been complied with 3. the debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 18-03-21 notice of which has been given to defendant  4. the claim incudes statutory interest under s69 of the county court act 184 at a rate of 8%per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of 132£ the claimant claims the sum of 1782£ 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 7.1PAPDC. 2. The Claimant claims £xxxxxx is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxxxx. 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  pursuant to sec87(1) of the CCA1974; and (c) 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.  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 Should the amount be the figure in the particulars or the final figure with the added fees Should the amount be the figure in the particular or the final amount with fees added
    • post it up here first for checking please dx  
  • 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

first direct


higgss
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6485 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 Guys

 

I have receved a letter back from First Direct saying that the charges aren't unlawful and asking me to write to Robert Kernaghan, Customer Relations Manager. Has anyone else received this letter saying to wrote to him and have you done a letter actually addressed it to him?

 

Thanks

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

This was in reply to the prelim letter which i sent on the 20th July. should i wait till the 14 days and then write to him or should i just go ahead now.

 

Thanks

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to wait the full 14 days but grew impatient. i also only gave 7 days on my lba.

 

They just offered me the full amount - the reason its advised to give 28 days in total is because if it actually gets to court it would look better on you.

 

its your call, i didnt wait as no case has gone to court yet as they have settled before this.

 

just bear in mind i was lucky and one day they may actually follow it through to court

 

from another way of thinking first sirect have responded in you timescale and told you to write to someone else............you could always send the lba to rob kerr and state you gave 14 days of which ** are left you are willing as a gesture of goodwill to add another 14 days onto the end of these which would in total be 28 days

 

or you could just wait

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya sorry if i confused matters

 

Moneyclaim is filling a claim at the court which gives the bank 28 days to either defend in full

or settle basically

 

By me saying they settle out of court i meant that they have not as yet let it go past the 28 days when a court date would be set and you would have to go to court yourself and give evidence as such and they would have to defend your claim.

 

No case has got to actually going to court on the day

 

hope this makes sence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Well got 2nd letter back from Robert K who says no to the refund. is this the time to put in for a claim as it was a no or do you think he will send another letter offering me something within my 14 days and if i do a claim do you think i will win? not worried now

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

hiya, i only gave 7 days in my lba not the 14. because my letter said the matter was closed as far as first direct was concerend i went straight to moneyclaim.

 

the 14 days is so u have given resonable time from the courts point of view

 

no case has actually got to a court hearing yet.

 

its up to you, some people like myself havent waited and we were paid in full just as we would have been if we had waited. its your call

 

I personally think that if they have said the matter is closed i would not wait others may disagree with me,:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Hannah and I did the same when I got the last letter saying NO and almost thats that I took it that the 14 day rule thing didnt count then because they were classing the matter as closed so I raised my moneyclaim - again this was my personal choice its upto you what u do

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys

 

When doing a claim and it comes to this

 

The claimant claims interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 15/7/04 to 7/8/06 of £XXXX and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of (£0.34).

 

would i just put in the interest i would be collecting which is £117 or the total amount which includes the interest.

 

Urgently need help with this part

 

Thanks

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

The claimant claims interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 15/7/04 to 7/8/06 of £117.00 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of (£0.34).

 

would i just put in the interest i would be collecting which is £117 or the total amount which includes the interest.

 

 

This is just the S69 8% interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Looks like FD are going to delay all the way. Also to advise Capital One have sent new terms where they have reduced their charges to customers to £12 instead of £20

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...