Jump to content


helpingfriend vs LLoyds credit card


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4787 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

Yes, I have previously done a SAR.

 

When you say 'If they have include bank charges', as this is a credit card, are you referring to late/missed payment charges?

 

Yes

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

then get reclaiming!

 

you can also charges them at their int rate from the date of EACH charge to the date of your claim

 

might be useful as a counter claim in your case?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
then get reclaiming!

 

you can also charges them at their int rate from the date of EACH charge to the date of your claim

 

might be useful as a counter claim in your case?

 

dx

 

Thank you.

 

Also, can you confirm whether or not they can include these charges in the default notice?

Edited by helpingfriend
spelling error
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

Also, can you confirm whether or not they can include these charges in the default notice?

 

It is illegal to charge for a default notice

86 E (6) of the CCA states

"the debtor or hirer shall have no liability to pay any sum in connection with the preparation or the giving to him of the notice under this section."

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is illegal to charge for a default notice

86 E (6) of the CCA states

"the debtor or hirer shall have no liability to pay any sum in connection with the preparation or the giving to him of the notice under this section."

 

sorry, I meant - late/missed payment charges

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you can still claim back credit card charges

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m putting together my defence.

 

The document they have supplied in post 6 is an application form although it has my signature on it.

 

It doesn’t contain the prescribed terms so this will form part of my defence – yes?

 

The document refers to terms and conditions for an existing card – Do I mention this? Should they have sent me details? Surely those existing t&c’s should also have my signature?

Link to post
Share on other sites

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

and post 16

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

No and I think it is because anyone would keep spending the money even if they later argue that the CCA isnt valid. When it comes to court the judge will think if the CCA wasnt valid

1. Why did the defendant spend the money?

2. If the defendant knew the CCA wasnt valid did they make a complaint before?

3. Did the defendant bother checking before enforcement or demads from the creditor?

 

The only way to go is through the CPR technique now. If they do manage to send you all the relevent documents then hope you get a good judge and brophy isnt quoted

˙os op oʇ pǝʞsɐ ssǝlun ǝƃɐssǝɯ ǝʇɐʌıɹd ʎq ǝɯ ʇɔɐʇuoɔ ʇou op ǝsɐǝlԀ ˙pǝɹnɔɔo sǝssol ʎuɐ ɹo ǝɹnlıɐɟ ɟo ʇlnsǝɹ ɐ sɐ ǝlqɐıl plǝɥ ǝq ʇou llɐɥs I ˙llıʍpooƃ ɟo ǝɹnʇsǝƃ ɐ sɐ os ǝuop sı uǝʌıƃ ǝɔıʌpɐ ʎu∀

Link to post
Share on other sites

No and I think it is because anyone would keep spending the money even if they later argue that the CCA isnt valid. When it comes to court the judge will think if the CCA wasnt valid

1. Why did the defendant spend the money?

2. If the defendant knew the CCA wasnt valid did they make a complaint before?

3. Did the defendant bother checking before enforcement or demads from the creditor?

 

The only way to go is through the CPR technique now. If they do manage to send you all the relevent documents then hope you get a good judge and brophy isnt quoted

 

2. I did bring this to their attention last year.

 

Through CPR they haven't sent all documents. They say they don't keep copies of DN's and don't need to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As they haven't sent copies of default notice, here's the defence I was thinking of putting in:

 

1. I of am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by Without fair warning the claimant brought this action in what appears ignorance of

the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocols Para 4.3, as no letter before action was received.

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

3. The claimants' particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the defendant as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16. this regard

I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters;

a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an

adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written contract referred to, the method the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim.

b) A copy of any evidence of both the scope and nature of any default, and proof of

any amount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has not been served.

4. On ........... the defendant submitted a request under CPR31.14 for a copy of the agreement and documentary proof of how the sum claimed has been calculated and any other documentation that the Claimant is relying upon in pursuit of this claim. The Claimant has failed to respond fully. Until such time that the claimant provides all documents requested of the sum claimed as overdue I am not able to fully audit the sum.

it is requested that the court orders the claimant to provide full disclosure of the requested documents pursuant to the Civil ProcedureRules failing which the claim be stayed

The Defendant respectfully asks the permission of the court to amend this defence if or when the Claimant provides full disclosure of the requested documents and allows inspection of the original documents.

 

 

What do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway, some poss points to consider in your favour

s127(3) consumer cred act (if prior to 2007) which is strict. re no signed doc that contains all of the prescribed terms?

s78 non compliance/not all of the original prescribed terms? (see for eg the recent phoenix case http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?291945-Phoenix-Recoveries-vs-D-Kotecha-Court-of-Appeal)

non compliance with cpr?

amount claimed contains unlawful/unfair charges?

imo

Edited by Ford
typ
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, its prior to 2007.

 

I'm not sure at the moment whether I should be submitting an embarrased defence because they haven't supplied all documents under CPR.

 

or a defence that asks for disclosure? but given that they have said they don't keep copies of DN's, is there any point asking for these to be disclosed.

 

or do I go for a strike out because they haven't supplied all docs?

 

thanks for any help

Link to post
Share on other sites

when is your defence deadline?

what specifically did you ask for in your 31.14 request? what did they send in response?

 

deadline is 22nd feb.

 

in 31.14 request I asked for copy of agreement and default notice. They sent copy of application form signed but without prescribed terms and said they don't keep copies of default notices but they did send one.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so, technically they may be regarded as having complied with your request?

is the app'n form the same as the one you posted before?

is the default notice itself compliant? (yes in general they don't keep copies. generally, they say that one was issued/posted and their e records will prob show that one was issued)

 

if you think that you may need more time to submit a defence, then you can try and agree with them, that they agree to an extension to your def deadline under CPR 15.5?

also, if not already, have a read of these stickies

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?241827-Legal-Action-how-to-start-off.-IMPORTANT-IF-YOURE-BEING-SUED

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?255329-CPR-part-18-vs-CPR-31.14-Confused-well-read-here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?283443-Embarrassed-Defences-and-the-problems-with-them.

 

imo

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry I just reread what I posted and realised it could be read 2 ways. when I said 'they don't keep copies of default notices but they did send one.' They didn't send me a copy of the default notice. I meant, they said 'they don't keep copies of default notices but would have deemed served as the posted it.

 

so, I don't have a copy of the default notice.

 

I've previously read those threads and think part of my confusion is that some defences I've read mention getting a breakdown of the amount owed. I guess as I didn't request this in my cpr, I should have and hence can't refer to it in my defence.

 

thanks for your help, I really appreciate it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so did they send you a def notice previously? if so, is it compliant?

cpr request may still be regarded as complied with as they don't keep copies of def notices.

they will probably get away with stating that they issued/posted a default notice, via a witness statement/e records. but, they will need to be put to strict proof that they did so, and that it is compliant?

is the app'n form that they sent you the same as the one you have posted up before?

what about trying for an extension?

imo

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember getting a DN previously so don't know if its compliant. earlier in the thread I was asked whether there were any late payment charges as these many have been in included in the default notice with interest added. Yes, there were late payment charges. Yes, the application is the one posted up before. I did ask for an extension and this was the date they gave me. The court have been informed of the new date.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok

have you got confirmation from the ct of your new date? if not, give them a quick call just to double check what your deadline is?

one part of your defence may be, 'notwithstanding' to put them to strict proof that they have sent a compliant def notice, and the amount in the default notice is accurate? (Wilson case)

also, notwithstanding, could mention s127 and put them to strict proof that the strict requirements of s127 consumer cred act? in particular s127 (3)? are satisfied?

and, notwithstanding, could put them to strict proof that they have complied with s78, in providing a copy of the correct prescribed terms as at the time of the agreement (Phoenix case) for eg?

also, anything else you can think of?

be careful not to make any unnecessary admissions in your defence?

you have a week to submit, so you have a bit of time.

imo

Edited by Ford
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...