Invalid Default Notices

[bradfordlad]

Surely all correspondence these days is produced electronically anyway?

 

I could produce a letter on my computer - save it to a shared hard drive, and someone in Bangladesh accessing the same drive could print it off & post it immediately.

 

I think we need to remember that we're dealing with global companies - it probably WAS someone in India that produced the letter!!!

 

Without wishing to stir up a hornets nest, have a look at any older correspondence from Mercers - you might find that they've used envelopes with a "2" on them in the past....

[means2anend]

okay so if it's deemed 2 days service and time line correct what about the other issues?

[cab1ne]

Doesn't that mean the copy posted from Northampton is not the same copy physically signed in Liverpool - or does the signer just call on Scotty to beam him down with the transmitted letter. :???:Does this matter? "no" signature not required on a DN

 

I still think it's worth asking all of these questions? If nothing else it will satisfyb our thirst for knowledge! to true ;-)

 

In any case are you saying our legal system recognises the existence of such technology? "BLESSEM" they are trying:p

cab

[Bigdebtor]

Thanks cab - just trying to think up other difficulties for our old pals in Mercers/Barclaycard! Surely claiming a letter came from Liverpool and it actually came from Northampton (or Mumbai) is simply lying? If so then how can we believe anything else they say?

 

That's like saying I'm actually "Smalldebtor" - although I'm fast heading that way thanks to CAG!

 

BTW I love bradfordlad's last point! Perhaps the Northampton envelope is not the one the letter came in after all? Maybe in came in a 2nd class envelope now mislaid? Why not put the sods to strict proof - and get them to exlain why Liverpool and Northampton are the next desk to each other!

 

I'm not suggesting lying - just that we should be asking more questions!

 

BD (not SD!)

[Shafters]

Hi I'm new to this site, How do I go about starting my own Thread for adivce on a default notice I think is Invalid!!

[Dotty50]

Hi I'm new to this site, How do I go about starting my own Thread for adivce on a default notice I think is Invalid!!

 

Who has sent it to you Shafters?

 

Will then direct you to the right place

[Shafters]

The Solicitor acting on behalf of the Debt collection agency who bought the debt! I suspect it to be a forgery!!

[InformedSearcher]

Okay, as far as DN's go, banks will ignore your comments and still post then onto CRA's. You can scream at the CRA's but they'll merely send your remarks to the originating entry bank and you'll simply get a 'The information is correct'. Now the DN is there (for 6 years) the issue is how to force it off without going to court. Who said justice was fair?!

 

Michael

[Bigdebtor]

Shafters

 

What Dotty meant was "which company (bank or credit card provider etc.) is the original creditor (OC) that you had the debt with?"

 

You should start a thread in that particular OC's forum.

 

Once you have done so, if you link it to this thread then we'll go into it and help you as much as we can.

 

Good luck

 

BD

[Shafters]

No, this is at court stage, I alledge the copy of the default notice I have been sent is fake!!

[Shafters]

MBNA, sorry, I don't know how to start a thread , sorry for my stupidity, I cannot find the "New Thread" button anywhere

[Dotty50]

MBNA - The Consumer Forums

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=69

 

See if this works.

 

Don't worry it took me ages to work it out when I first found CAG!

[Shafters]

Found out how to start a new thread and have done so in MBNA,

 

thanks

[Shafters]

Thanks Dotty, I didn't realise it had to be in a certain forum!!

[Shafters]

I have started a new thread,

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/263411-invalid-default-notice.html

[Desperate Daniella]

I still don't know how to put a new thread in a particular forum. (I've only been here for 18 months!)

[lexis200]

You do make me chuckle DD:)

[Desperate Daniella]

I'm very glad about that, Lexis, but seriously, how do you choose a forum for a thread?

[Dotty50]

I just go to the main forum page and find the bank or other, click on the link and there is a blue thread icon near the top.

This is Barclays if I have done it right!

The Consumer Forums

 

I was trying to put the new thread icon here but it won't work, sure I have done it before!

 

Think I need some lessons DD!

[means2anend]

No, this is at court stage, I alledge the copy of the default notice I have been sent is fake!!

 

 

 

That's a very bold assertion Shafters...I understand that YOU are taking them to court...

 

Do you have any Prima Facie evidence that it is a fake?

 

rgds

 

m2ae

[diddydicky]

the default notice is dated 7th it was posted first class so deemed served 9th

 

you have 14 days AFTER 9th which is 24th

 

the DN ONLY gives you until the 23rd

 

it is an invalid default notice

 

if parliament had intended that you should have had only 13 days- it would have said so

 

it is a simple point of law

 

you should accept their unlawful repudaition and point this out to them and there will be a costs implication and possible abuse of the legal process if they attempt to enforce through the court- having been made aware of the point of law

 

 

mercers are ACTINg for barclaycard- you are a layman- there is no reason why you should be expected to know that barclays and mercers are one in the same

 

indeed, the mention of the phrase "acting for" would lead a right thinking person to beleive they were two separate entities

 

the law is clear- the creditors (which is not mercers) name and address must be on the DN- just further fuel for the fire

 

 

the notice does include the action to be taken if you fail to comply

Edited June 11, 2010 by diddydicky

[diddydicky]

In my opinion the dates on the DN are correct if it was posted 1st class as it appears to have been. Before the date shown is correct and counts as 14 days.

 

if a DN demands action BEFORE the specified date

 

in the case the 24th. then it is demanding that the recipient comply by close of business on the 23rd- since if the debtor paid the money at 9am on the 24th he would have failed to comply

 

if the DN had said he was to comply BY the date shown THEN it would be correct

 

therefore the DN has given the debtor on 13 days from the date of service

 

 

 

the envelope clearly shows a first class posting

 

the claimant will simply swear that it was posted first class on the day it was dated therefore any argument or attempt to get evidence of the internal postal system would be seen to be disproportionate and in any event is not necessary since the DN is defective anyway

[Drederick Tatum]

Thank you all for your comments.

 

Am I right in thinking they have to terminate before I post an unlawful rescission letter? Also by posting this would I be admitting the debt?

 

A question for DiddyDicky...

 

the envelope clearly shows a first class posting

 

the claimant will simply swear that it was posted first class on the day it was dated therefore any argument or attempt to get evidence of the internal postal system would be seen to be disproportionate and in any event is not necessary since the DN is defective anyway

 

If I didn't have the envelope, would it be up to me to prove that the letter was posted second class or would it be down to Mercers to prove they sent it first class?

[Bigdebtor]

The Court would believe them because they would never lie!

 

BD

[lexis200]

From memory, doesn't the court assume post is 2nd Class if there is nothing to prove otherwise?