Jump to content


Is this Default Notice valid (2)


Artie44
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5317 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 again,

 

This DN is dated 17th March, so assuming 1st class delivery of 2 working days takes it till 19th. Then add 14 days takes it to 2nd April. But it only allows 12 days as it demands payment by 31st March.

 

What about the statement in capitals, doesn't also have to have the text in bold underlined too?

DNP1-1.jpg

DNP2-1.jpg

DNP3.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. Invalid but don't tell them. Let their mistake be to your benefit.

 

If they terminate the account, they can only then claim for the arrears that caused the default

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I read somewhere that if they unlawfully rescind the agreement neither the balance or arrears would be payable as the creditor needs a live agreement to legally claim them. Is there case law to clarify this point either way please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Failure of a Default or Termination Notice to be accurate not only invalidates such notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co NLD 14 July 1998 but it is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt (Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (2003) UKHL 40, Wilson V Robertsons (London) Ltd(2006) EWCA Civ 1088, Wilson v Pawnbrokers (2005) EWCA Civ 147) - but would also give the claimant a claim for damages in the sum of £1000 (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society (1996) 4 All ER 119).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...