Abbey Default - Judgment by Default, set aside request received

[jon_boy75]

No.

 

The Account is governed by the FSA.

 

The Overdraft is governed by the OFT.

 

It's the Overdraft you're challenging, so the OFT's Determination applies.

 

 

 

Yes, to challenge them, but keep reading that thread

 

Ok, I'm fully up to date now and thankful that my claim is less complex than yours was! I will keep updating here on progress. I have never received an agreement of any kind, or DN, or Termination letter, or anything relating to an overdraft...so let's see what happens.

Next steps are:

 

• Enforcement, as I got Judgment by Default
  
• Inevitable hearing when they ask for set aside
  
• AQ - in which I will request disclosure of relevant docs
  
• Allocation
  

thanks again

[jon_boy75]

The Financial Ombudsman has decided NOT to uphold my complaint against Abbey. They were satisfied with a blank template letter in place of a Default Notice! Brilliant

[car2403]

[GerryPerry]

Jon Boy

 

that's precisely the situation I am in; 'new' information has been miraculously found in their Court bundle - a generic default notice and a system entry. They will be in court by the end of the month.

 

Cheers GP

[jon_boy75]

Jon Boy

 

that's precisely the situation I am in; 'new' information has been miraculously found in their Court bundle - a generic default notice and a system entry. They will be in court by the end of the month.

 

Cheers GP

 

Interesting! Well, good luck man. Nothing has really changed here, it still remains the case that they defaulted me without letting me know, thereby breaching the Consumer Credit Act. However, I am worried that a judge will be equally satisfied by their bull**** version of events.

I'm still pushing ahead though, because similarly to the situation with CAR, they have failed to provide an agreement of any kind, despite 3 seperate requests.

I will be involving the FSA next to sort that out.

[jon_boy75]

Abbey have requested the Judgment be set aside. I will post up details tomorrow. Now we start properly!

[jon_boy75]

Abbey have requested the Judgment be set aside. I will post up details tomorrow. Now we start properly!

 

Ok, I don't know what to do now? They have sent an Application Notice to me and the Court and an Accompanying Witness Statement for their client (Abbey). Specifically on the Application Notice, they're asking the court for an order that:

 

1. default judgment be set aside pursuant to CPR part 13.3(1)
   
2. the defendant be granted permission to file a defence to this claim in the form of the draft defence attached
   
3. the claimant's particulars of claim be struck out pursuant to CPR Part 3.4(2) on the basis that the POC disclose no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim and/or;
   
4. the defendant do have summary judgment against the claimant on its defence pursuant to CPR part 24.2 because the claimant has no real prospect of succeeding on the claim for the reasons set out in the witness statement of xxxxxxxxxxxxxx dated 9th Sept 09 and there is no other compelling reason why the case should be disposed of at trial.
   

They want the application dealt with at hearing and by a DJ, estimated 2 hours.

So, do I need to write to the court to object to this? Or prepare my claim in full? Any help appreciated.

[jon_boy75]

something I have so far excluded from my claim is the fact that charges up to the point of the default totalled £2740. The alleged default was for £108! Not sure if I should pursue that, as I could get allocated fast track

[car2403]

Need to see the witness statement

 

What was the date of the Judgment and what is the date of this application, along with when esxactly did you receive it?

[jon_boy75]

Need to see the witness statement

 

What was the date of the Judgment and what is the date of this application, along with when esxactly did you receive it?

 

Notice of Judgment entered on 19th August 2009.

Application notice date (handwritten) 9th September 2009. I received this 11th September 2009.

 

I am scanning witness statement (this is a represntative of the solicitor, not someone from Abbey). Do you want it up here or PMd?

[car2403]

It's probably ok to post it here - just remove any identifying information first

[jon_boy75]

It's probably ok to post it here - just remove any identifying information first

 

Ok, scans done, which I will post up now. However, I'm reluctant to post up my numerous comments about their statement, as this will only highlight to them the shortcomings of their argument...which they may then change.

 

?

[car2403]

You can PM/email it to me if you like

[jon_boy75]

[car2403]

As they haven't received the claim form, they will get the set aside. although they could have had it as they seem to think they have a defence as well.

 

Really, those POC need to be elaborated on. They've applied for Summary Judgment as the POC are vague, according to them. I don't agree, but there is more information that could have been given to them.

 

Where there any directions from the Court, a Notice of hearing, or anything? What was contained on their application?

[jon_boy75]

As they haven't received the claim form, they will get the set aside. although they could have had it as they seem to think they have a defence as well.

 

Really, those POC need to be elaborated on. They've applied for Summary Judgment as the POC are vague, according to them. I don't agree, but there is more information that could have been given to them.

 

Where there any directions from the Court, a Notice of hearing, or anything? What was contained on their application?

 

1. Claimant held a Current Account with the Defendant, xxxxxxxx, from September 98 to December 06.

2. A default appears on the Claimant's credit reference file relating to

the account.

3. The Defendant: a) Has failed to comply with a Statutory Notice issued by the Claimant pursuant to s.7 Data Protection Act.

b) Has applied the 'Default' without complying with the requirements of s.87 Consumer Credit Act.

4. The Claimant respectfully seeks:

a) Rectification, blocking, erasure or destruction of the inaccurate data, which the Court can order under s.14 Data Protection Act 1998, including details passed to the Credit Reference Agencies.

b) Costs and damages at the discretion of the Court under s.13 Data Protection Act due to the damage to the claimant's creditworthiness. The claimant has suffered a significant waste of personal time in pursuing this matter through the correct channels.

 

I havent received anything else from the court since they sent me the Notice of Judgment Entered on 19th August

[jon_boy75]

1. Claimant held a Current Account with the Defendant, xxxxxxxx, from September 98 to December 06.

2. A default appears on the Claimant's credit reference file relating to

the account.

3. The Defendant: a) Has failed to comply with a Statutory Notice issued by the Claimant pursuant to s.7 Data Protection Act.

b) Has applied the 'Default' without complying with the requirements of s.87 Consumer Credit Act.

4. The Claimant respectfully seeks:

a) Rectification, blocking, erasure or destruction of the inaccurate data, which the Court can order under s.14 Data Protection Act 1998, including details passed to the Credit Reference Agencies.

b) Costs and damages at the discretion of the Court under s.13 Data Protection Act due to the damage to the claimant's creditworthiness. The claimant has suffered a significant waste of personal time in pursuing this matter through the correct channels.

 

I havent received anything else from the court since they sent me the Notice of Judgment Entered on 19th August

 

I know this is brief, but it specified on MCOL to keep it brief! Oops:confused:

[car2403]

I know this is brief, but it specified on MCOL to keep it brief! Oops:confused:

 

Something like this;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/110146-car2403-hfc-bank-default-6.html#post1305973

[hanban8]

Something like this;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/110146-car2403-hfc-bank-default-6.html#post1305973

 

i still have the opportunity to do this, right? It's not going to get struck out due to a brief POC? Or is it...?

[jon_boy75]

i still have the opportunity to do this, right? It's not going to get struck out due to a brief POC? Or is it...?

 

I wrote this message when signed in under my friends account!! That's why it says HanBan! It's still me though jon_boy75

[jon_boy75]

Something like this;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/110146-car2403-hfc-bank-default-6.html#post1305973

 

Ok, I'm reading through this now and using it as a template for mine, in terms of the structure that is. Hope that's ok.

thanks

Jon

[jon_boy75]

car

 

quick question, CCA doesn't apply to me as I dont owe any money (I think?). That being said, would this now be purely a DPA issue?

[jon_boy75]

this has been transferred to my local court, presumably for an allocation hearing. I havent received anything from the court yet. I have, however, almost completed a skeleton argument which I will post up shortly. Nerves kicking in now, as expected!

[car2403]

car

 

quick question, CCA doesn't apply to me as I dont owe any money (I think?). That being said, would this now be purely a DPA issue?

 

Yes, quite, but compliance with the requirements of the CCA will still be an issue in deciding whether they have processed your data accurately under the DPA.

 

I'm at a loss as to why they decide to argue against accounts that no longer have any balance owing on them

[jon_boy75]

Yes, quite, but compliance with the requirements of the CCA will still be an issue in deciding whether they have processed your data accurately under the DPA.

 

I'm at a loss as to why they decide to argue against accounts that no longer have any balance owing on them

I think, as is often the case, they are hoping I will pull out first. They will be reluctant to remove a default they believe is justified as it undermines the whole system.

 

The system is broken already...they just need to accept that.