Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks Dx. Amended defence set out below. Does it look right now?   1. By agreement between the defendant and Halifax on or around the 3/3/2015 (the agreement) Halifax agreed to loan the defendant monies.     2.The defendant did not pay instalments as they fell due.     3.The agreement was terminated following a service of a default notice.     4.The agreement was assigned to the claimant.     5.The claimant therefore claims 1. 4.5k 2. Costs    Defence   1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.     2. 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 7.1 PAPDC.     3. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is accepted that I have had financial dealings with Halifax in the past. However I do not recall entering into any financial agreement with Halifax on or around 03/03/2015 and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my request for further information.     4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of any payment terms for the stated agreement.     5. Paragraph 3 is denied. It is denied that Cabot Financial served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant. The Claimant is required to prove that the any Default notice relied upon complied with the requirements of s88(4A) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and that the notice was in the prescribed form as required by The Consumer Credit Enforcement Default and Termination Notice Regulations 1983.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied as I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the claimant or the original creditor.     7. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant; the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of credit agreement / assignment / balance / breach requested by CPR 31.14, and remains in default of my section 77 request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a. Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and   b. Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and   c. Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim     8. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of Royal Mail on 13/10/20 a CPR 31.14 request from the claimant’s solicitors and a section 77 requests to the Claimant, for copies of the documents referred to within the Claimant’s particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant has failed to comply with my section 77 request and their solicitors, Mortimer Clarke, have refused my CPR 31.14 request.     9. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.     10. 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 82 A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974     11. 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.  
    • I'm generally convinced that there is at least 2 users on MSE that's in my thread that has friends or family or even themselves that have similar line of work to MB or Gladstone.   I don't mind different opinions but they're just throwing out playground insults to me for using that letter saying I'm stupid, prat, idiot etc etc for doing it and not including in the letter without prejudice so it can't be used against me in court. I think I'll leave MSE and just stick with CAG and pep in this case.    
    • not sure what happened to the statint sheet...looks like you over wrote cells.   so they have already litigated over this debt ?
    • Fraudsters are using the details of firms we authorise to try to convince people that they work for a genuine, authorised firm. Find out more about this ‘clone firm’. View the full article
    • Any time limits AZ might spout are simply arbitrary, the ONLY thing you need to be doing is informing them ''in writing'' of your new address.   Also ensure your CRF is updated and showing your correct address also.   When you send AZ the letter which needs only to be one line......   Sir/madam.   My current address is No.1 Mickey mouse street blah blah blah, please update your records accordingly.   Regards   And obtain ''proof of posting'' which is free from the po counter, send it 2nd class post.
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4016 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Absolutely , there is already sufficient established case law that sets the ground work out clearly

 

the problem is that the agreements we see, they contain all manner of different combinations of errors, for most of them, there is established case law to show the law on misstated prescribed terms etc, so i fear that staying all claims will only serve to help the creditors who will be left with the ability to expect repayment of loans while the debtor is left with no recourse

 

Forgive the ignorance of a novice, Pt, but could people lodge a claim against their creditor on the grounds of unenforceability, even whilst claims are stayed, in order to suspend loan repayments? :confused:

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

'PPI and Unenforceability Claims'

 

The letter from 'ultimate law' does seem a little suspect, but then again I am no expert.

It certainly rings as though its written in favour of those collecting debts and intended to deter those paying from taking any legal action, but as I said I am no expert.

But very interested as I am currently going through lega proceedings with RBS.

P.

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged posts

Im happy to help with support and my own opinions but as i have no legal qualifications If I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been told about this apparently they are one of the "duff" variety of claims management companies that have sprung up and I am told it only applies to their claims for their clients, I have been given the impression that the solicitors in question are perhaps not as good as some at making claims.....

 

This comes to me from one of the big claims management firms who are rubbing their hands at another copycat company going out of business, or certainly out of their business arena.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have just been told about this apparently they are one of the "duff" variety of claims management companies that have sprung up and I am told it only applies to their claims for their clients, I have been given the impression that the solicitors in question are perhaps not as good as some at making claims.....

 

This comes to me from one of the big claims management firms who are rubbing their hands at another copycat company going out of business, or certainly out of their business arena.

 

 

Daniella from Ultimate law seems to be a busy girl with an agenda see this

 

**EDITED**

 

I understand she used to work for another claims company and set off on her own a short time ago with big ideas and an over inflated ego and has now been found out.

Ooops

Edited by car2403
commercial links
Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniella - nice name for a creditor's poodle;)

 

"Zero success rate" - tell that to pt:lol:

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

Court has confirmed the letter is genuine

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged posts

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only in relation to any claims that they are handling. A Judge has placed a 'Stay' on THEIR client cases only. This will be down to that particular company's lititgation tactics.

 

It does not mean that all cases are on hold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it just goes to prove you are better dealing with it yourself rather than use one of these companies!!

A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining and wants it back the minute it begins to rain.

- This quote has been attributed to Mark Twain

Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing out of interest ....

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

feels like the 'bank charges' fiasco all over again ...

 

test case .... no refund or write off .... debtors still obliged to pay .... 2 years down the line ....

Edited by tifo
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting that its Chester and MBNA area....

 

I was recently talking to someone about claims and saying I was putting mine in and she told me her friend works for MBNA and they have been told that no-one has had a successful claim with MBNA.....

 

Funny that! Not what I've heard form actual people making claims

 

Seems to be a bit of internal PR going on too!

 

Are MBNA worried?

 

Should be from me, they have admitted no agreement available on one account, yet are still chasing me and "threatening" my house!

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the first part of the fight back we all knew would come but I did not expect them to have the courts in their pockets

courts in their pockets?

 

come on, this is nonsense, ive just spoken to Chester High Court, yes there is to be a stay in place on CCA claims, the stay as far as i understand it will stop the lenders as well as the debtors, so it is balanced unlike the bank charges issue.

 

the injunctive relief claims can still proceed as can claims such as the likes of Next Directory and any other lender who confirms they do not have an agreement or that you never signed an agreement. there is going to be further guidance given shortly so its not all doom and gloom

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just rang chester court spoke to listings and was told there was no stay. All cases are currently awaiting allocation and the judge dealing with it all is off for a week

Link to post
Share on other sites

Far to many of the claims firms have been set up!

 

I note that Ms. Lipszyc also set up a company called;

the financial claims service.

 

PPI claims etc, have become a revenue stream for law firms.

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites
I just rang chester court spoke to listings and was told there was no stay. All cases are currently awaiting allocation and the judge dealing with it all is off for a week

yes i understand it is to be put in place not that its already in,

 

as far as the court manager said, they understand that cases are already being transfered to HHJ Halbert from other district registries but no stay is in place on those claims as yet

 

the info coming out of chester is sketchy at best

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll stay the lot, so they can complete this:

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2009

 

The 1974 Act is now scrapped, as is our last largely unsuccessful 2006 attempt to neuter the awkward 1974 Act.

 

s1

 

(1) Banks are now above the law and cannot be held accountable for their actions.

 

(2) Anything a banker says is deemed to be accurate and must be believed.

 

(3) No Agreements necessary, a copy of absolutely anything will do and will be enforced by the Court.

 

(4) Default Notices are no longer required, all previous Default Notices are deemed to be valid.

 

s2

 

(1) Consumers have no rights and are in the wrong by default.

 

(2) Anything a Consumer says can be wholly disregarded.

 

s3

 

(1) Banks can end any Agreement at any time, without giving notice.

 

(2) Banks can vary any Agreement at any time, just by thinking about what they want the most.

 

s4

 

(1) Banks cannot be guilty of Harassment.

 

(2) Section (1) also applies to their Agents.

 

s5

 

(1) Pay up.

 

(2) Interest of 25% applies to (1) from any date a bank feels is most lucrative.

 

Notes:

 

Applies retrospectively to all debts from 1066 onwards.

The alarming thing is...some of this appears to be happening already, at least from the way some Judges now behave.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites
yes i understand it is to be put in place not that its already in,

 

as far as the court manager said, they understand that cases are already being transfered to HHJ Halbert from other district registries but no stay is in place on those claims as yet

 

the info coming out of chester is sketchy at best

 

pt I have received this morning an order relating to a case MBNA are bringing against me asking for disclosure etc and it is dated 6th May,after the announcement of the alleged stay

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4016 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

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...