Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  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. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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 4966 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

In conclusion..this is a subject we are all learning about as we go along, and we have had to be fluid and respond to new knowledge, changing our responses accordingly.

I believe the correct way to refer to these situations in responding to creditors is as "Your Unlawful termination amounting to repudiatory breach of contract" or similar. Others may differ and I may have to change my views in the light of superior knowledge, but that's the way I would currently phrase it myself.

 

Elsa x

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

In conclusion..this is a subject we are all learning about as we go along, and we have had to be fluid and respond to new knowledge, changing our responses accordingly.

I believe the correct way to refer to these situations in responding to creditors is as "Your Unlawful termination amounting to repudiatory breach of contract" or similar. Others may differ and I may have to change my views in the light of superior knowledge, but that's the way I would currently phrase it myself.

 

Elsa x

 

I'm learning plenty! Thanks Elsa and others.

 

However, the repudiation angle - there's been a lot of discussion here about the need for the debtor to accept this (explicitly), but this isn't a part of Woodchester. Swayne & Co do not say that they accepted Woodchester's unlawful repudiation/rescission.

 

So I cannot help wondering if there is a need or, if there is, whether it can be made some considerable time after termination.

 

LA

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In conclusion..this is a subject we are all learning about as we go along, and we have had to be fluid and respond to new knowledge, changing our responses accordingly.

I believe the correct way to refer to these situations in responding to creditors is as "Your Unlawful termination amounting to repudiatory breach of contract" or similar. Others may differ and I may have to change my views in the light of superior knowledge, but that's the way I would currently phrase it myself.

 

Elsa x

 

Sorry Elsa, yes I really like that approach.

 

Some may say that the agreement is not actually terminated even when a TN arrives. However, I would just say that it is terminated, only it has been done so unlawfully. This would be easier to demonstrate where credit facilities have been removed or goods repossessed.

 

Therefore Elsa's wording is based entirely on reality, at least as far as I can see!

 

LA

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The question of acceptance has had much debate on here. In the legal profession it's generally stated that you need to accept by word or deed, but even within the legal profession there are those who argue otherwise.

For example:

Lord Steyn said it was established law that where a party had repudiated a contract the aggrieved party had an election to accept the repudiation or to reaffirm the contract. Acceptance of a repudiation required no particular form; it was sufficient that the communication or conduct clearly and unequivocally conveyed to the repudiating party that the aggrieved party was treating the contract as at an end. The aggrieved party need not notify the repudiating party of his election to treat the contract as at an end; it was sufficient that the fact of the election came to the repudiating party's attention.

 

From Vitol SA v Norelf Ltd; House of Lords (Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Chancellor, Lord Griffiths, Lord Nolan, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann) 20 June 1996.

 

From our own point of view, as laypersons, I feel it's best to err on the side of safety and accept, providing the account has been terminated or the full balance demanded. (In which case the phraseology should perhaps be "by unlawfully demanding sums not yet due under the agreement by virtue of the fact that you have failed to issue a legally compliant Default Notice you are in repudiatory breach of contract, which I have elected to accept" ) Or similar.

 

With regards to timescale - the sooner the better after the repudiation, but not before termination/demanding full balance, obviously.

If time has passed and you have done nothing to either confirm nor deny acceptance, then you can logically be accepting in the light of advice or realisation of your rights.

If you've carried on paying you'll have more of a problem but further discussion is probably needed on whether that's surmountable.

 

Just my opinion :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Unndercover-Elsa there is some merit in what you say in relation to

 

''with regards to timescale.......but not BEFORE they terminate/demand full balance

 

Maybe that SHOULD bethe point at or after which the lenght having elapsed should be the starting point for the countdown as to whether debtor witin a reasonable time accepted the repudiation/UL..

 

As then the debtor cannot be said to not be aware of the circumstances within which to accept by continuing to pay or write the acceptance letter

 

m2ae

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so. I think in earlier days on here we were keeping quiet and hanging on for termination letters which never came. Many OC's simply go on to demand the full balance, then pass it on to dca's acting on their behalf. To me that is just as much a repudiation as a termination letter, since demanding sums not yet due is unlawful if the DN isn't valid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I am so sorry to ambush this thread but can someone please have a look at my thread - link below? It's all very relevant to DNs and unlawful recsission etc. I've just posted up version 2 of my Defence and I need to get it in to the Court by Tuesday so getting desperate for some reassurance and comments on it.

 

After reading Undercover Elsa's last post I might change my wording from unlawful rescission to unlawful repudiation.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/257032-rbs-mint-loan-court.html

My opinions are not expressed as an agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. My advice is given freely but please remember to always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star below.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

BD ref post #3311

 

It was a general question. I suspect that we have all had offers similar to this, and as they are requesting you to clear your account - albeit with a reduced sum - could this be taken as termination, if it followed a DN?

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

BD ref post #3311

 

It was a general question. I suspect that we have all had offers similar to this, and as they are requesting you to clear your account - albeit with a reduced sum - could this be taken as termination, if it followed a DN?

 

Alan

 

No, I wouldn't want to rely on them making an offer of discount as termination. They are not actually "demanding" payment of amount not yet due, just making you what they would call a generous offer....

 

That's just my opinion, but I would only regard a letter as termination if it demanded full payment immediately and threatened legal action as a result of non-compliance with their demand...

Here are links to my other threads... Please take a look and offer any help you can. Thanks...

 

1. Legal Action - Cabot Financial (Goldfish Account) ***WON***

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?252630-Urgent-Help-Required-With-Disclosure-***WON***&highlight=

 

2. Legal Action - Set aside application - Marlins/Phoenix

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?265002-Set-aside-of-judgement-(acceptance)-help-needed&highlight=

 

3. Legal Action - Set Aside Default Judgement -Santander (B & Q Store Card)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?261340-Urgent-Help-required-drafting-defence-for-set-aside-application&highlight

 

You can make a donation here:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Section 87 is not relevant!

 

 

 

Handed a copy of the above case at court today.

 

Judge agreed that DN was received 4 days after date to comply.

Prescribed terms were missing.

That it did not comply with S87, but S87 was not relevant.

 

Maybe one of the lawyers/solicitors on this site can post up the case.

 

Swayne & co overturned.

 

Need to get drunk

Edited by enslaved
removed case
Link to post
Share on other sites

should add it was an appeal heard at thesitting as a judge of the high court, (£$%*).

 

To avoid confusion this judge was at the AMEX v Brandon not my case.

Edited by enslaved
remove case
Link to post
Share on other sites

Enslaved. Sorry to hear this news.

 

Could this outcome be because reference was not made to The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237) which state that in order to be valid, a Default Notice needs to contain certain specific information.

 

As far as I'm aware S87 of the CCA refers to the right to issue a DN etc and various other rights that creditors and debtors have and not the content of such.

My opinions are not expressed as an agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. My advice is given freely but please remember to always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star below.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Post #3310 above....

 

I think I recall DD stating elsewhere that repudiation is the more accurate term to use. Unlawful rescission has slightly different connotations in that it sets the agreement back to the point before both parties entered the agreement, whereas repudiatory breach of contract gives rise to a cause of action for the injured party to sue for damages.

 

Quote...

 

"Could this really place those who have used the word 'rescission' in a letter of acceptance in danger of having their agreements reinstated? - if so, could this not open up another can of worms... a loan not covered by any agreement to repay??? If the OC's and DCA's are spying on us, then they must be getting quite excited".

 

On what basis would the OC claim.... could this not bypass the CCAct and revert to contract law????

 

Just thoughts

Link to post
Share on other sites

But in swain photocopier was taken away so agreement was enforced.

 

Argued that taking away time to pay by demanding full balance was enforcement. Argued for 3 hours Mcguffick was covered extensively in my skeleton.

 

2 further DN's sent in past two weeks neither valid.

 

Judge just brushed away these and said 'so, they can issue another one tomorrow it's not relevant'. the case is 8 july I still have not got a valid DN!

There going to get judgement without ever serving a valid DN:confused: as they don't have time to serve another.

 

judge used Para 33 & 34 verbatim.

 

So statute law and statutory Instruments are not relevant anymore, go figure.

 

I'll try that if I get stopped in my car:mad:

 

Judge used to work for large bank:(

Edited by enslaved
removed case
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the problem we have at the moment. Some judges are ignoring the law - and the DN issue.

 

They cannot issue more than one Default Notice.

 

Sorry, enslaved, if I have missed something, but is this an Amex case too?

 

Well, the judge is obviously biased. I wonder if anything can be done about this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll need more expert help than I can offer, but I don't think there is any difference about DNs. They have to follow a set format and there can only be one of them.

 

Have you already searched for others with the same loan/creditor and seen how they are doing.

 

I agree with PT. I don't think that judgment will stand for long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But in swain photocopier was taken away so agreement was enforced.

 

Argued that taking away time to pay by demanding full balance was enforcement. Argued for 3 hours Mcguffick was covered extensively in my skeleton.

 

2 further DN's sent in past two weeks neither valid.

 

Judge just brushed away these and said 'so, they can issue another one tomorrow it's not relevant'. the case is 8 july I still have not got a valid DN!

There going to get judgement without ever serving a valid DN:confused: as they don't have time to serve another.

 

judge used Para 33 & 34 Brandon case verbatim.

 

So statute law and statutory Instruments are not relevant anymore, go figure.

 

I'll try that if I get stopped in my car:mad:

 

Judge used to work for large bank:(

 

Did the judge say why s87 was not relevant in your case?

 

And has the contract been terminated? Eg, is the OC claiming arrears or the full balance? The judge's comments about issuing further DNs suggests that he's under the impression that the contract is still live.

 

LA

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a CC with Halifax and accepted UR following an invalid DN and termination. I've since had several months of being pestered by Robinson Way so last week wrote to them explaining the UR. Today I received this:

We refer to your recent query & comment. In view of your query, we have today removed your account from our files, and returned your case to our Client who will, if appropriate, deal directly with you in the future.

 

Our client has been made aware of the reason why your account is being closed and returned to them.

My first DN victory, even if only a modest one!

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4966 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...