Anatomy of a Default Notice

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi,

Have you done a Subject Access Request? The comms log would normally show up whether a DN was issued. Otherwise it's your word against theirs. It's far easier to defend with a faulty DN than no DN, unfortunately.

 

Elsa x

[Nomore Baloney]

No, and its prob a bit late. This is going back to 2003 ish though

[Undercover-Elsa]

How long have you got? Do you have time to send them a part 18 request asking whether it was normal practice to note issuance of a DN on the comms log? Followed by a 31.14 request for copy of comms log once they mention it in their response. Just thinking out loud.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Here's a compilation of legal issues threads with more info on disclosure:

pt-legal issues-compilation.pdf

Disclosure of information Regs.pdf

[Nomore Baloney]

Is a witness statement provided by the claimant sufficient to demonstrate service of a DN when they unable to provide a copy?

[MandM]

Is a witness statement provided by the claimant sufficient to demonstrate service of a DN when they unable to provide a copy?

 

Pretty much. The originator of the DN rarely keeps copies. They would usually give a WS and a copy of a screenshot (or similar) from their "system" to demonstrate when it was issued plus a copy of a template of the DN issued to demonstrate its form/wording.

 

You'll find it tricky to argue against this unless you have the original + envelope that shows that what they're saying is wrong.

 

Mike

[Undercover-Elsa]

Or your own screenshot of the comms log showing none issued when they say it was?

[means2anend]

By comms log...do you mean a SAR?

[Guest]

Pretty much. The originator of the DN rarely keeps copies. They would usually give a WS and a copy of a screenshot (or similar) from their "system" to demonstrate when it was issued plus a copy of a template of the DN issued to demonstrate its form/wording.

 

You'll find it tricky to argue against this unless you have the original + envelope that shows that what they're saying is wrong.

 

Mike

 

agreed. on balance (and remember it is on 'probability'), if it shows on their log that a dn was issued, plus an affidavit with a template, and it was not returned as undelivered, then it would be difficult to rebut service/form without any evidence to the contrary.

imo

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

By comms log...do you mean a SAR?

 

Record of communications to/from creditor/debtor

[means2anend]

Thanks Brig

 

m2ae

[hatesdebt]

Sorry, probably asking a thikko question here which has probably been answered (but it's a long thread to go through)

Just received a dn from BOS, nothing in bold, although there are a lot of caps.

 

Anyway, the dn is dated 3rd Oct, but I only received it today. Does the 14 clear days start from date of receipt or the date on the dn?

 

I'll post it up over the weekend anyway.

 

Thanks all

 

PS, remedy date is stated as 24th Oct

[postggj]

Pretty much. The originator of the DN rarely keeps copies. They would usually give a WS and a copy of a screenshot (or similar) from their "system" to demonstrate when it was issued plus a copy of a template of the DN issued to demonstrate its form/wording.

 

You'll find it tricky to argue against this unless you have the original + envelope that shows that what they're saying is wrong.

 

Mike

 

 

just going on from this

 

to comply with the default and termination regs, the default notic must be in the correct form etc

 

a scanned copy would need to be kept by the creditor if any discrepancies came to light later on

 

failure to rectify within adaquate timescale for instance (dates)

 

being a default notice is needed prior to any enforcement action we can then bring into the equation

 

woodchester v swain

 

if they produced a witness statement then i would be demanding a true and certified copy of the default notice that was sent out being the cause of action

 

BUT THATS JUST ME:madgrin:

[hatesdebt]

[/img]

[hatesdebt]

Page 2http://i52.tinypic.com/2n06gib.jpg[/img]"]

[craigers]

[/img]

 

is this a current account? if it is, then i'm afraid there isn't the same protection offered as for loans and credit cards. there is no need to give 14 days to rectify the problem.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Seems Like a Loan and maybe a consolidated

overdraft, mentions monthly payments

and overdraft limit.

[postggj]

If an overdraft is included then a default notice would be needed as certain parts of an overdraft are covered by the cca 1974

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Post, the wording does suggest, loan

and or overdraft, cannot be sure until

the OP tells all.

[hatesdebt]

Thanks for the input.

 

To explain.

BOS got themselves in a real pickle with these accounts. They describe them as a bank account with an ongoing o/d facility, but they're not. They are registered as a credit card with cra's. It's a running credit agreement and therefore bound by the cca1974, but they try to tell you it's not.

 

The agreements on these are known to be 100% u/e and they have already lost / withdrawn from court with these.

 

Does that help?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

It certainly does thanks.

[Guest]

for general info. for o/d's after the euro directives re consumer credit, a 'cca' would be required re an overdraft.

[alangee]

hatesdebt

 

As far as dates are concerned - unless my maths is wrong - the DN is compliant.

 

You received it yesterday the 8th, so the 14 clear days start from today the 9th. They state before 24th, so you are given 15 days to comply.

 

Alan

Edited October 10, 2011 by alangee

[hatesdebt]

Hmm,

 

I'm seeing it as 10 as weekends don't apply?

[the_shadow]

Hmm,

 

I'm seeing it as 10 as weekends don't apply?

 

Weekends only matters for service, its a straight 14 days to remedy the default.

 

S.