Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What type of finance is it?   HP, PCP, Loan? They want her to ring so they can bully her into making payments she can't afford...unless she can record her calls then IMHO, I'd keep everything in writing. Is £400 SSP her only income? There's no chance they will justify taking half of that.   Lodge a formal complaint with them ASAP, exhaust it, and then you can escalate it sooner rather than later, ruddy sharks!  
    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

MandM vs Egg Loan ***Won with Strike Out***


MandM
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2925 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

Is this DN worth arguing???  

2 Caggers have voted

  1. 1. Is this DN worth arguing???

    • Yes, argue all the way!!!
      2
    • No, they've got you beat.
      0


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 619
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It came with a cover letter which stated that 'the judge was uncertain, in light of the further information' (given by the claimant), whether I have a reasonable ground for defending the claim!!!!!

 

The court has directed that a hearing be listed at which the issue can be considered and, if necessary, directions for trial given

 

 

I have not yet allowed the other side access to the dodgy DN, no doubt they'll now see it on the 15th.

 

Never been to a CMC so any thoughts on what to expect and how to prepare would be of great benefit :).

 

If i'm reading this right, I assume this is can be a good opportunity to get the claim struck out, or if I can show clearly enough that the claim cannot or should not succeed then SJ is a possibility.

 

Any help or ideas on what next?

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then, time to bring things to end :D,

 

M

 

Did you apply for a Strike Out?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, this is why we say strike first. :-(

 

They have now written to the Court basically asking for SJ against you saying there is no merit in your defence - they have suggested that the court make this SJ on their own, but the Court have decided a CMC to look at it then.

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a 'thread summary' anywhere?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread Summary.

 

May 09 – Defaulted on loan

 

June 09 – Solicitors involved

 

End July 09 – Summons received from Northampton. No attached paperwork

 

Aug 09 – Embarrassed defence submitted (Post 7) – Draft Directions Post 32

 

End Sep 09 – AQs arrive

 

3rd Oct 09 – spotted problem with their DN (prescibed wording missing) http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae316/slinkymary50/Top2.jpg

 

4th October AQs completed (Posts 69 to 77) – Directions Post 82

 

Received Sols AQs which had attached; a copy of the agreement with a set of T&Cs which did not tie up correctly (wrong ones), a spreadsheet showing how they arrived at their POC figure but showing a random amount of about £600 to make their figure correct, and a template of a DN together with a WS stating that everything enclosed is correct!

 

All documents posted up in posts 142 to 146

 

22nd Oct 09 - General Form of Judgement or Order (form N24) made without a hearing. Gave the claimant until 5th Nov to submit the docs upon which they rely.

 

7th Nov 09 – Received the same docs AGAIN from the Sols on which to base my defence.

 

19th November – Defence submitted to court. Main details are

(i) The DN is missing prescribed wording (does not mention that it was issued in accordance with Sec 87 of the CCA 1974.

(ii) The sum claimed on their POC is incorrect and does not tie up with anything (out by about £600)

(iii) The T&Cs supplied are not correct for the agreement supplied. Picked out half a dozen or so discrepancies where the ‘clauses’ mentioned on the agreement were either missing or elsewhere in the T&Cs to where they were supposed to be.

 

I believe that the T&Cs supplied were their up to date ones so had a few extra clauses and some changes.

 

5th Dec 09 – received Form N24 from the court asking for further directions. As follows;

Draft Order for Directions

 

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order file and serve the following:

 

* Copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim, and any documents referred to within it which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, which the claimant seeks to rely upon. Copies of original document only will suffice.

 

* Copy of the Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, as issued to the Defendant and which the claimant seeks to rely upon.

 

* Copies of all original statements for the duration of the alleged agreement, used to establish a balance on the claimants Particulars of Claim dated XXXXXXX

 

* Copies of any other document to be relied upon

 

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

Having regard for the Overriding Objectives it is averred that without disclosure of the above documents the Claimants case can not proceed and this is regarded as a further frustration to intimidate me in theses proceedings.

 

If the Claimant is unable to produce the documents to verify their claim it is requested that this matter be struck out pursuant to CPR 31 .8

Cover letter was also sent to Sols confirming the same.

 

14th Jan – received notice from the court that they had used my Draft Directions and issued them to the Sols – but given them a further 28 days to comply.

 

2nd Feb – Received from the Sols the following

(i) The generic DN as received previously and a screenshot showing when it was sent.

(ii) A copy of the CCA together with the same incorrect T&Cs that they have been sending since October.

(iii) 4 screenshots showing the payments made to the account and the account balance – again, the figures are not as on the POC. They also made the following statement “Statements are produced on an annual basis. Copy statements have been requested but it is unsure as to when these will be received. The screenshots provided show all payments received to date on the account”.

 

4th Feb – A spreadsheet received from the Sols showing all payments made on the account – it is JUST a spreadsheet so not on Egg headed paper and it’s headed Account Statement For The Period. It then shows on a single page all transactions against the account. Again, none of the figures shown tie up with the POCs figure.

 

Now – have received the CMC/Interim Hearing Notice in Post 377

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated>>>>>

I am in receipt of your General Form of Judgement or Order dated 17th February 2010 and I am a little surprised at the contents therein.

 

The claimant has not complied with the directions given by the court on 13th January 2010 and I assumed, as a litigant in person, that the court would deal with the claimants non-compliance and that the claimants case would be ‘struck out without further order’ as stated on the Order for Directions.

 

In fact, the claimant has failed to comply with any of the directions given and detailed as follows;

 

(i) Default Notice – The Order for Directions stated * Copy of the Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, as issued to the Defendant and which the claimant seeks to rely upon.

 

The claimant has submitted a ‘specimen’ Default Notice and has requested sight of the original in my possession. I am somewhat bemused at this as I have submitted a true copy previously with my defence and will, of course, bring the original to court. The claimant is fully aware that without a compliant Default Notice then their case has no prospect of success in court.

 

(ii) The Agreement – The Order for Directions stated * Copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim, and any documents referred to within it which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, which the claimant seeks to rely upon. Copies of original document only will suffice.

 

The claimant has again submitted a copy of the original agreement, again with a copy of the incorrect terms and conditions. The correct terms and conditions have been requested repeatedly from the claimant and the irregularities between the agreement and the terms and conditions have been highlighted within my defence submitted.

 

(iii) Statements – The Order for Directions stated * Copies of all original statements for the duration of the alleged agreement, used to establish a balance on the claimants Particulars of Claim dated 27th July 2009.

 

In their letter of 2nd February the claimant stated they were awaiting statements from their client as these were only produced on an annual basis. On the 4th February the claimant sent a one page ‘Statement of Account’. The claimant appears to have overlooked the directions “used to establish a balance on the claimants Particulars of Claim” as again, the figures given do not establish the sum shown on their Particulars of Claim.

 

 

In light of the above I respectfully request that the claim be struck out without further order in accordance with the courts Order for Directions dated 13th January 2010.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

MandM

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Magda observes, what is the "further information" that seems to have prompted the court to this course of action? Do you know what it is? Have you had sight of it? If not, I would suggest that you should insist on both these things.

 

Hi SFU,

 

The further information is the docs mentioned in my letter in the post above. I would assume that they have written to the court and confirmed that they have complied with the courts directions - or that the court have decided of their own initiative :rolleyes:

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the front cover sheet sent with the General Form of Judgement or Order it states If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it.

 

I guess my letter fulfills this.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the front cover sheet sent with the General Form of Judgement or Order it states If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it.

 

I guess my letter fulfills this.

 

M

 

Not really, an application is filled out on form N244 complete with evidence and a fee :-(

 

Your letter is an informal request which may or may not be accepted by the court.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, an application is filled out on form N244 complete with evidence and a fee :-(

 

Your letter is an informal request which may or may not be accepted by the court.

 

S.

 

Thanks Mr S

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, an application is filled out on form N244 complete with evidence and a fee :-(

 

Your letter is an informal request which may or may not be accepted by the court.

 

S.

Was received on Friday - so in that case I have this week to apply by N244 to have their case struck out?

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

mandm

This is a thread on letter - v - N244

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/134001-suggested-letter-where-claimant.html

 

I did a letter, but there are varied opinions on what one to use!!

 

MJ

  • Haha 1

__________________

CAG Depends Purely Upon Donations. Please help us to continue helping you, and give what you can - Thank you:grin:

Click to donate

 

Please click my scales, if you feel the need;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

mandm

This is a thread on letter - v - N244

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/134001-suggested-letter-where-claimant.html

 

I did a letter, but there are varied opinions on what one to use!!

 

MJ

 

ty MJ. I'm actually subbed to that (but forgot about its existence lol)

 

Have had a quick read and I think I will adjust my own letter to suit.

 

Many thanks

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the more aggressive approach is by N244 which i'm quite happy to do.

 

If it's on an application then the DJ will, I assume, have to consider it.

 

I could actually do both, as in put the letter in and then follow it with an application also. Or is that just unnecessary?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi m&m, the N244 doesn't have that much space on it, so when it comes to giving your reasons for the strike-out, you could just say, please refer to attached letter. Save you doing it all again anyway.

 

I'm sure you know this already, but you can complete the N244 online and just print it off. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious:):)

 

Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi m&m, the N244 doesn't have that much space on it, so when it comes to giving your reasons for the strike-out, you could just say, please refer to attached letter. Save you doing it all again anyway.

 

I'm sure you know this already, but you can complete the N244 online and just print it off. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious:):)

 

Magda

 

Thanks Magda.

 

Rotten cold :( so nothing's too obvious at the moment. Def should have had a day in bed.

 

Have made a few small changes to the letter to give it a bit more venom so the 'as attached letter' works well for me :)

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH I would not apply to have the order set aside.

 

The order is that the Court have decided a CMC would be a good ides - you writing to the court saying they're talking bowlarks may put their backs up somewhat!!

 

What you *could* do would be to apply for the claim to be struck out due to failure to comply with the orders and previous CPR breaches etc

 

That should then be heard at the same time.

 

At the moment, the hearing is for further directions or Summary Judgement either way OR your defence being struck out (and SJ against you by default)

 

At the moment the option of the claim being struck out is not being considered yet there was an 'unless' order already issued that they have failed to comply with.

 

If you're going to do it it needs to happen ASAP as normally there needs to be 14 days notice - but as there is already a hearing it should be ok

 

It will also mean they will have to submit their argument against it (7 days before) and you can submit yours in answer and for it (3 days before)

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you *could* do would be to apply for the claim to be struck out due to failure to comply with the orders and previous CPR breaches etc

That's the bit i'm concentrating on :). I was going to submit the N244 requesting that the claim be S/Out due to them not complying with the courts previous 'unless' order. (There's no problem with CPR as it was never used - all disclosure has been done through directions).

 

The letter that i've sent just points out my 'surprise' as a LiP that the court appear to have accepted the other sides documents, although all of the documents they have submitted are those used previously i.e. wrong T&Cs, no confirmation from statements proving the POCs figure, template DN.

 

Up my sleeve I also have the other DN which is missing (the very important) prescribed wording which the other side have now 'requested' to see.

 

 

At the moment the option of the claim being struck out is not being considered yet there was an 'unless' order already issued that they have failed to comply with.

So I want to bring this back to the fore. According to the wording on the order I have 7 days (from service) to apply to have the order amended which still gives me over 2 weeks left :).

 

 

Now the tricky bit - the other side have expressed a wish to see the DN - should I write to them in the meantime and say 'OK, your case cannot succeed with this DN, therefore, i'll let you see it and give you the opportunity to withdraw'.

 

I'm hesitant about using the dodgy DN as part of the S/Out, because if the judge doesn't go with it then that knocks out a large lump from my defence. Which is why i'm thinking along the lines of SO due to non-compliance as the safer route for now.

 

What do you think?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...