Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. 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 (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed 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. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. 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. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (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 of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Channel 4 Dispatches to air debt collection exposé


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5438 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

I second that, mattyd1979, consider turning your knowledge into something constructive, offer your time to a debt councilor?

 

Crikey this is addictive. DEFFO last post.

 

If I stopped Debt Collecting then another 'Mark' might jump in my place!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I could not agree more. The thing is I never even defaulted with RBoS. They used xmas 2007 as an excuse to send my debt to a DCA. They used the slow postal service at xmas time as an excuse to get around me making them a decent monthly repayment offer which I was *ALREADY* paying and was *NEVER* in default. How the hell could they send my debt to a DCA when I *WAS* paying them and *NEVER* defaulted???

 

I wonder if there is any way to contest this now.

 

yep that Rbos for you :(

 

I missed 2 payments with them due to a job change & they defaulted me without warning then sent the court docs to my old address & I didnt know for 3 months. Then they sold my RBS mastercard to a DCA without defaulting me properly & I got a CCJ for that too !

 

as the government owns them now perhaps they should sort them out but I doubt it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep that Rbos for you :(

 

I missed 2 payments with them due to a job change & they defaulted me without warning then sent the court docs to my old address & I didnt know for 3 months. Then they sold my RBS mastercard to a DCA without defaulting me properly & I got a CCJ for that too !

 

as the government owns them now perhaps they should sort them out but I doubt it!

 

I never defaulted though. I am hoping this will stand me in good stead if it ever goes to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes ,this programme shone the light on the wrong doers, but there was nobody to tell these people of their rights,i.e CCA,SAR or anything else !

if the people in this programme had information like we have on this forum,then perhaps they would not be in the situation that they are !

Perhaps the CAB and other help sites should help !

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG i watched part of the programme and cant believe the comments from th Marlin guy.

 

The Debt is SB and no CCj so they cant get a attachment of earning or discuss with 3rd party.

 

Also the person who was watching How on earth was what he was doing a minor rule break. Threating someone re a SB debt is not a minor rule break IMO. Breaking the third party rule is not a minor rule break IMO and calling the prson back when they have already hung up on them as they are at work is not a minor rule break IMO.

 

the programme just goes to show how easy it is for this dca ocs etc to get away with things.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this was an interesting programme but nothing really new, which is a pity, I think more could be done about people who use unscrupulous methods but it does not appear to be a priority, there sadly will always be folk who are attracted to positions of power among all kinds of trade where they can abuse others, it usually comes down to background stuff, personal experiences be acted out against others and so on.

 

rules and guidelines are put in place because we know we all fallible, it is the failure of those responsible for enforcing them that must be held to account.

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG i watched part of the programme and cant believe the comments from th Marlin guy.

 

The Debt is SB and no CCj so they cant get a attachment of earning or discuss with 3rd party.

 

Also the person who was watching How on earth was what he was doing a minor rule break. Threating someone re a SB debt is not a minor rule break IMO. Breaking the third party rule is not a minor rule break IMO and calling the prson back when they have already hung up on them as they are at work is not a minor rule break IMO.

 

the programme just goes to show how easy it is for this dca ocs etc to get away with things.

 

I lost count of the number of bad words I said whilst watching this....you are right Godmother, minor breach?????

 

And what about him telling her employer she is basically not doing her job, avoiding people on the phone...FFS!

 

Karma is a magical thing 'Mark' :mad:

 

Disgusted but even more determined to spread the word and fight them

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done it and I don't need to defend myself because I do an honest job and help people out wherever I can. I found the programme pretty painful to watch tbh.

 

Many Many years ago I went on a course at the Birmingham Settlement - on bailiffs - there was someone there from Bristow & Sutor Certificated Bailiffs from Redditch - I remember him telling us that Bailiffs were doing debtors a favour by seizing their goods - it helped them clear their debts.

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two wrongs don't make a right. Surely saying it is good that Mark's life is in danger makes you as bad as them?

So it's totally right for this Mark to put debters lives in danger? People have committed suicide because of pr**ks like him! They have no where else to turn and it all becomes too much!:mad::mad:

 

I don't think he should be a target for anyones aggression but he should lose his job and then maybe he will feel the pinch, have some other pr**k ring him up and ask for the debts he can't afford to pay!

 

Then 2 wrongs will make a right!:grin::grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

omg just finished watching dispatches what a bunch of arrogant t****rs they were what i would have given to reach in and slap some of them especially that woman who didnt give two s***s that that poor mans baby had just died good it has made me so mad............poor dog was frightened half to death as i was sat here screaming at my laptop watching it lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5438 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...