Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
    • The Barclay Card conditions is complete. There was only 3 pages. This had old address on. Full CCA. 15 pages. The only personal info is my name and address. Current Address The rest just like a generic document.  Barclays CCA 260424.pdf
  • 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

Cabot Claim Stayed-advice Needed Please On What To Do Next


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4806 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

Hi, I have asked this question on another Cabot thread that has all details of my claim (not sure how to link it to this one?) Not had a response so I thought a new thread might help.

"Hi, this was is largely directed at PT 2537 (he may be on holiday?) who kindly drafted me a witness statement and draft order for a N244 Application a few weeks back. You will recall I was a little hesitant as whether to file it at that stage, however, I agreed it was the best course of action, there was some delay sending it off as I was waiting for a letter from the DWP to support my exemption application, it was then returned because of an error and the fact the exemption form I had downloaded was now outdated, resubmitted it, then it was returned again because the DWP letter was not signed and had to wait for another.

 

In the meantime two things have happened, one, Cabot responded to my Subject Access Request with a bulky set of papers, for the three credit card accounts, which I had to go through before I resubmitted the N244 in case they had provided the documents we were requesting, there was nothing of any significance for Monument apart from a printed paper advising Kingshill No.1 Ltd had bought that debt (not Cabot Financial (UK) and an application form, nothing at all for Citi Financial, however, there was a two page signed agreement for Cahoot (mostly illegible) the prescribed terms are not on the signature document, it was for the first credit card, and says APR is based on a limit of £100 (not £8000) there is nothing to justify or explain all the charges Cabot have added, no default notices, and all the Cahoot statements are more their coded records, not customer statements.

 

I phoned the court today for advice, they said Cabot’s deadline for responding to my defence was 2nd July and they would now have to make an application to continue the action and explain the delays. I asked if I would have to re-date my N244 they returned with all the papers? She said the fact they have not responded to your defence means there is no need for an N244, she said they are usually used to have a judgement set aside, and in this case there is no judgement against you, and the judge will stay it in 14 days from 2nd . What’s your take on this now, do I go ahead and file the N244 as it stands giving them a further 21 days to comply, or let sleeping dogs lie? "

 

All opinions appreciated

 

Kind regards

 

Bernie

user_online.gifreputation.gif report.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I have asked this question on another Cabot thread that has all details of my claim (not sure how to link it to this one?) Not had a response so I thought a new thread might help.

 

 

"Hi, this was is largely directed at PT 2537 (he may be on holiday?) who kindly drafted me a witness statement and draft order for a N244 Application a few weeks back. You will recall I was a little hesitant as whether to file it at that stage, however, I agreed it was the best course of action, there was some delay sending it off as I was waiting for a letter from the DWP to support my exemption application, it was then returned because of an error and the fact the exemption form I had downloaded was now outdated, resubmitted it, then it was returned again because the DWP letter was not signed and had to wait for another.

 

In the meantime two things have happened, one, Cabot responded to my Subject Access Request with a bulky set of papers, for the three credit card accounts, which I had to go through before I resubmitted the N244 in case they had provided the documents we were requesting, there was nothing of any significance for Monument apart from a printed paper advising Kingshill No.1 Ltd had bought that debt (not Cabot Financial (UK) and an application form, nothing at all for Citi Financial, however, there was a two page signed agreement for Cahoot (mostly illegible) the prescribed terms are not on the signature document, it was for the first credit card, and says APR is based on a limit of £100 (not £8000) there is nothing to justify or explain all the charges Cabot have added, no default notices, and all the Cahoot statements are more their coded records, not customer statements.

 

I phoned the court today for advice, they said Cabot’s deadline for responding to my defence was 2nd July and they would now have to make an application to continue the action and explain the delays. I asked if I would have to re-date my N244 they returned with all the papers? She said the fact they have not responded to your defence means there is no need for an N244, she said they are usually used to have a judgement set aside, and in this case there is no judgement against you, and the judge will stay it in 14 days from 2nd . What’s your take on this now, do I go ahead and file the N244 as it stands giving them a further 21 days to comply, or let sleeping dogs lie? "

 

All opinions appreciated

 

Kind regards

 

Bernie

user_online.gifreputation.gif report.gif

 

 

Hi Bernie Kingshill and cabot are the same company (the reg number are the same).

 

The problem is that Cabot have a nasty streak, they will sell the dept on to another DCA. You state that you have the SAR back, and that they sent in three Credit cards, check the the agreements, are they signed by you or the bank or are they blank? Are they trying to pass off a application form as an agreement? Past them up for us to have a look?

As I said they are sneaky..

 

I'm not sure if you can submit a N244 just yet, if it was me I would give them the 28 days then submit and ask the DJ to have the DCA remove the data, so thay cannot sell on the account.

 

Trooper68

Trooper68:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Thanks very much for that. The SAR only produced one credit agreement for the Cahoot card, an application form for monument and nothing for Citi Financial, no defaults for any of the accounts and only their headed letters (regenerated) saying they bought the debts, they are abviosley struggling to put together a reply to the defence which placed the onus on them to prove everything. I am severley disabled and maybe they have had a change of heart if their claim is weak? I had read on a thread that a judge advised is was risky sometimes filing a N244 giving them three weeks to come up with everything because it might just prompt them to do just that, this is a £20,000 claim. A big thing in my case, that I have not brought to Cabots attention is even if they do manage to get a default judgement the court cannot order me to pay what I cannot afford, so I presume they are looking at getting a charging order, the problem for them there is I only have about £37,000 equity in the property, and the NHS already have a judgement against me for £75,000, which they have not enforced on compassionate grounds, if Cabot are going to be heartless then I may as well offer the NHS the equity instead.

 

Thanks again

Bernie

 

Thanks Bernie

Link to post
Share on other sites

N244's are used for most applications not just applications to set aside judgment.

 

At this point, however, I would hold off on the N244. The proceedings have been stayed - if/when the other side have the stay lifted I would lodge it at that point.

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

True - but creditors like this often apply to lift the stay

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

Thats true but once they have applied to lift the stay, which they will get they don't need to have any problem getting that, it will also cost them to send out the AQ

 

Oh yes that is true BUT don't forget that as far as the fees paid by the claimant on the AQ and listing go if they win they recover them from the other side. The fee payable to lift the stay shouldn't be recoverable.

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

The costs are only one of the factors that a claimant considers when deciding whether to pursue a claim or not...I don't know anything about the details of the claim or as to whether this claimant thinks that its' worthwhile.

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

Thank you all for your comments, I think it would be wise at this stage to wait and see, and as you advise, file the N244 if they apply to have the stay lifted, I could also write to Cabot at that stage and put my cards on the table and advise them that if their is any possibilty that they would get a charging order then I would invite the NHS to enforce their order first, at least the money would be going to a better cause and I know they would not make us homeless.

 

 

I have read that a claimant can apply to have a stay lifted without informing the defendant, does anyone know if thats correct?

 

Regards

Bernie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your comments, I think it would be wise at this stage to wait and see, and as you advise, file the N244 if they apply to have the stay lifted, I could also write to Cabot at that stage and put my cards on the table and advise them that if their is any possibilty that they would get a charging order then I would invite the NHS to enforce their order first, at least the money would be going to a better cause and I know they would not make us homeless.

 

 

I have read that a claimant can apply to have a stay lifted without informing the defendant, does anyone know if thats correct?

 

Regards

Bernie

 

At this stage I wouldn't contact them - incidentally as far as the NHS Charge goes - as its' there first it has priority...

 

Yes - at this stage they can apply to lift the stay without telling you

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

Hi, Thanks very much for that. The SAR only produced one credit agreement for the Cahoot card, an application form for monument and nothing for Citi Financial, no defaults for any of the accounts and only their headed letters (regenerated) saying they bought the debts, they are abviosley struggling to put together a reply to the defence which placed the onus on them to prove everything. I am severley disabled and maybe they have had a change of heart if their claim is weak? I had read on a thread that a judge advised is was risky sometimes filing a N244 giving them three weeks to come up with everything because it might just prompt them to do just that, this is a £20,000 claim. A big thing in my case, that I have not brought to Cabots attention is even if they do manage to get a default judgement the court cannot order me to pay what I cannot afford, so I presume they are looking at getting a charging order, the problem for them there is I only have about £37,000 equity in the property, and the NHS already have a judgement against me for £75,000, which they have not enforced on compassionate grounds, if Cabot are going to be heartless then I may as well offer the NHS the equity instead.

 

Thanks again

Bernie

 

Thanks Bernie

 

 

Hi Bernie

 

Hang in there buddy, stick up the paperwork.

 

Trooper68

Trooper68:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

URGENT ADVICE REQUIRED PLEASE

Hi to you all, I really do need your help again, I have just received court papers confirming Cabot has applied to have the stay lifted some 20 months after the court stayed their claim and the court has granted this, and sent me an AQ to fill in and send to my local court, there are no details of the grounds the court has considered to grant this lifting after so long, it was stayed because Cabot could not provide any of the documentation needed to support their claim of £20,000 for 3 different credit card debts, and could therefore not file a response to my defence, its seems grossly unfair to leave this hanging over a severely disabled person and I feel they are taking advantage of my poor health, they have not complied with CPR, the court papers state I can apply to have the decision set aside? I am very confused, because if I don’t know the grounds they have considered to grant the lifting then how can I prepare arguments against this. I would be very grateful if anyone could advise me what I need to do now, I have until 7th March to respond, this is causing us a lot of anxiety.

Thank you

Bernie

Link to post
Share on other sites

HELP !!!

 

I have just looked at the court papers which were delivered while we were away, it states we have 7 days from service of this order to apply under Part 23 Rule 10 to set aside or vary, the Order is dated 18th February but we did not get it until 27th when we returned home, is the date of the order the same as service? Is there anything we can do now?

Thanks

Bernie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...