Faulty Mint Default Notice?

[joneseyblod]

Hi

 

Could someone please advise if this default notice by Mint is valid?

 

I think they may be at least a day short as the 7th November 2008 was a friday.

 

Or it might be a couple as it advises payment to be credited before the date shown, and that date is a monday and sunday you cant make payments, but I guess you could on a saturday?

 

[fuzzybobble]

If the DN was dated on a friday, then it's deemed served 2 working days after. In your case the following wednesday, unless you have the envelope and can prove it was posted second class, then it would be served on the friday

 

They're stuffed anyway, as the DN has to state an actual date that the default has to be rectified by.

 

Also if tthe amount of arrears contains any unlawful penalty charges, then that can render the DN invalid too.

 

Another small point is the section that's all in capital letters. The underlined parts should also be in bold print.

[joneseyblod]

Hi!

 

Thanks for the reply

 

I have the envelope and it was sent 1st class. Based on that the 14 day thing works out as the 25th doesnt it?

 

They state it must be credited before the 17 days which I believe the 17th day is the 24th and a monday too, so at best it actually gives until the saturday 22nd? or Friday 21st is it?

 

I didnt realise they must specify an actual date and cant give a number of days, will have to double check the info you posted on the HFC thread!

 

Thanks again for the info! Just need to compile a letter as this account has been terminated following that default.

 

Best wishes

 

JB

[joneseyblod]

I cant find anything in the info you posted on my HFC / Marbles thread about defaults having to specify an actual date, otherwise the default being invalid. The legislaiton does mention dates before, and the default notice itself does use wording of date before in it. But there does not seem to be anything concrete on giving a number of days being incorrect...

 

Can you or someone please point me in the direction of any legislation that maybe makes it clear that specifiying an actual date must be given on the default notice and not a number of days.

 

Also if someone could please offer some suggestion on these two queries it would be much appreciated!! Would like to be sure I wasnt given the clear 14 days after service as a back up argument.

 

Based on that the 14 day thing it works out as the 25th November 2008 doesnt it? (From Friday 7th November being sent out, deemed served Wednesday the 12th November, and 14 clear days from there)

 

They state it must be credited before the 17 days which I believe the 17th day is the 24th November 2008 and a monday too, so at best it actually gives until the saturday 22nd? or Friday 21st is it?

 

Best wishes

 

JB

Edited March 20, 2009 by joneseyblod

[joneseyblod]

Bump please

[fuzzybobble]

I've found the bit of the law that mentions a few times about an actual date being stated to remedy a DN.

 

 

(8 ) Contents and effect of default notice.

(1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form and specify -

(a) the nature of the alleged breach;

(b) if the breach is capable of remedy, what action is required to remedy it and the date before which that action is to be taken;

© if the breach is not capable of remedy, the sum (if any) required to be paid as compensation for the breach, and the date before which it is to be paid.

(2) A date specified under subsection (1) must not be less than seven days (14 Days from 19/12/2006, see below) after the date of service of the default notice, and the creditor or owner shall not take action such as is mentioned in section 87(1) before the date so specified or (if no requirement is made under subsection (1)) before those seven days have elapsed.

(3) The default notice must not treat as a breach failure to comply with a provision of the agreement which becomes operative only on breach of some other provision, but if the breach of that other provision is not duly remedied or compensation demanded under subsection (1) is not duly paid, or (where no requirement is made under subsection (1)) if the seven days mentioned in subsection (2) have elapsed (now 14 Days, see below), the creditor or owner may treat the failure as a breach and section 87(1) shall not apply to it.

(4) The default notice must contain information in the prescribed terms about the consequences of failure to comply with it.

(5) A default notice making a requirement under subsection (1) may include a provision for the taking of action such as is mentioned in section 87(1) at any time after the restriction imposed by subsection (2) will cease, together with a statement that the provision will be ineffective if the breach is duly remedied or the compensation duly paid.

The Act does mention the word Date, suggesting that is what Parliament wanted to see appear in a Default Notice...

Quote:

(b) if the breach is capable of remedy, what action is required to remedy it and the date before which that action is to be taken;

[joneseyblod]

Thank you!!

[Pipster2797]

did anything happen with this and what was the outcome? Im in a similar position

[diddydicky]

I cant find anything in the info you posted on my HFC / Marbles thread about defaults having to specify an actual date, otherwise the default being invalid. The legislaiton does mention dates before, and the default notice itself does use wording of date before in it. But there does not seem to be anything concrete on giving a number of days being incorrect...

 

Can you or someone please point me in the direction of any legislation that maybe makes it clear that specifiying an actual date must be given on the default notice and not a number of days.

 

Also if someone could please offer some suggestion on these two queries it would be much appreciated!! Would like to be sure I wasnt given the clear 14 days after service as a back up argument.

 

Based on that the 14 day thing it works out as the 25th November 2008 doesnt it? (From Friday 7th November being sent out, deemed served Wednesday the 12th November, and 14 clear days from there)

 

They state it must be credited before the 17 days which I believe the 17th day is the 24th November 2008 and a monday too, so at best it actually gives until the saturday 22nd? or Friday 21st is it?

 

Best wishes

 

JB

 

if it is sent 1st class on a friday then it is deemed served on the following TUESDAY the 14 days runs from wednesday and are calender days wich leave is one day short

 

there are differing views on the way the date for remedy is displayed, some of the more ardent views are that the date has to be specific however my view (based on reading court files ) is that no court to my knoweldge has yet rejected a DN on account of the remedy date being expressed as a number of days from the date of the DN rather than the specific date.

 

you should therefore assume that until such time as there is a ruling that you are unlikely to get a DN ruled out on this one fact (although as i said this one is defective as 14 days gives you to the 25th and not the 24th as they state

 

also if you sar them and find that it was not posted until the monday (as could be likely) it will give you an even bigger shortfall)

 

now you need to check that the arrears figures quoted are spot on- if they include illegal charges that is another defect in the DN

[joneseyblod]

Sorry for delay here. I had a family issue that knocked the wind out of my sails for a while...

 

I have wrote a couple of letters to Mint in reference to the Default Notice, but mysteriously they keep vanishing.

 

Plan is to do SAR and place account in dispute over the amount owed. As I now believe I owe the arrears stated in the invalid default notice only, as the account was subsequently terminated.

 

Any other suggestions or thoughts?

[cerberusalert]

Have a read of; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/170345-tale-dodgy-dn.html#post1837307

[joneseyblod]

Read through that previously, and also currently reading through the discussion thread on it. Both very interesting reading.

 

Im just unsure what to do if my letters to MINT keep vanishing, as its not really something to take them to court with (invalid default and then termination) but to use if they take you to court