Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 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 4546384809766042. The defendant faild 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. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  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. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
    • what device are you using? copy all the questions then come here to this thread and paste them. then answer each question click on red give answers here. when done  hit submit reply bottom right.  
  • 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

Invalid Default Notices


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4955 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

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!!!:D

 

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....;)

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

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? :roll: "BLESSEM" they are trying:p

cab

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by diddydicky
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4955 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...