Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. 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. 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 24/12/2022. 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 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: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Cabot/Morgan & My Monument card case


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5039 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

Allan,

 

I think that just about sums up Cabrot. :grin:

 

If only the D.J's could be made aware of how they operate.

 

AND. AND....

 

the O.F.T faced up to its responcibilities......

 

If only...

 

 

fussey

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 373
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

OH WELL,

 

In court later on this morning (Thurs,,),

 

Guess what ., received a third witness statement yesterday from Cabrot.

 

Saying that the dates on the Deed of Sale for the Deed of Assignment were incorrect, and that ,

 

"after requesting my supervisor to supply the correct signed , offer for sale letter. we now have the correct date of sale."

 

Then a copied letter saying,

 

"1 We refer to the account sale agreement (such account sale agreemnt, as from time to time amended supplimented or novated being herein called the account sale agreement ) dated 12th Oct 2005

and made between ourselves and yourselves.

 

2 Terms defined in the account sale agreement shall bear the same meaning herein.

 

3 We hereby offer to sell you on the 27th September 2006 (the

offer date). the accounts (the accounts) listed in the schedule

hereto and notify you that :

 

(i) the aggregate Face amounts of the accounts listed in the

schedule hereto as at 21 september2006 (which shall

constitute the determination date for the purpose of this offer)

 

was XXXX blanked out XX

 

(ii) the offer price (inclusive of a discount of XXX is £XXX

 

This is just a copy A4 sheet at the bottom it says,

 

Yours faithfully'

( scribble )

For and on behalf of Barclays bank plc.

 

There is no headed "Barclays or their address " on the letter,

and no printed name for the scribbled signature.

 

Then, there is a blank sheet headed, " Schedule. (list of accounts)."

 

So still no direct evidence to my account...

 

wish me luck

 

 

fussey

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Good Luck Fussey, That sounds like as much use as a chocolate fire guard, keep at the rights and duties as per S189 CCA its statute and therefore cannot be overlooked.

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance of posting it up here?

 

I assume there was no permission for them to file the WS? If so, then the Judge is perfectly at liberty to dismiss it.

 

In one of my cases one of my WS submissions was ignored entirely because I did not have permission to file it.... I suggest you argue the same!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd be inclined to ask for an adjournment and costs

 

as a LIP you may need time to understand the signficance of this late change of evidence and you might want to take advice as to calling this witness to court to be questioned

 

a witness who changes his statement should be interrogated and the evidence tested

 

if the judge refuses the adjournment and you lose- then there is yet another ground for an appeal

Edited by diddydicky
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you could respectfully point him to the law regarding Wilson and respectfully ask for him to re-consider the point???

 

 

personally i would not ask him to re consider the point and leave the situation whereby there is a possible ground of appeal for his self mis direction

 

also if he has spoken in the manner/tone you have reported- it may well indicate to an appeal judge a certain amount of bias

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya all.

sorry I Lost.. feel like I let everyone down.:(

 

Same judge, same bias.

 

He agreed with Cabrot.

 

Heres a short version as I have to go to work now..

 

Don't need to see NoA it , "would be included in the sale agreement."

 

Shedule of accounts below, ( blank )

 

Yes Fussey " as I said it would already be in the Sale agreement".

 

Did you receive a D. N. fussey? well I cant find it I dont know if one was sent.....

 

Well on the "balance of probabilities", " I am happy that they would have sent you one, and in the absence of you not knowinh or being able to prove otherwise, I will accept that one was sent....:shock:

 

Judgement for claimant......

 

sir I wish to appeal......

 

WHY :-o

 

you have accepted no evidence frm Cabrot except when you asked their representative.

 

You have accepted "unlawfull rescission" as NO D.N.

 

I have already said fussey, In the balance of probabilities, I believe that they would have sent one.

 

You must remember that yu are dealing with LARGE crtedit card companies

who know what they need to do........

 

Appeal denied. Good afternoon.

 

I am shaken.... and most definatley STIRRED......

 

Fussey.

 

One Good Thing, they asked for £2650. costs judge said NO ( Small Claims)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone once said in one of my threads 'where was this case heard a casino?'. Another DJ that has ignored Statute Law and taken the moral high ground, terrible and should definatley be appealed

 

I am shaken.... and most definatley STIRRED......

 

Dont let this one go Fussey

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i totally agree another dj lottery...when are these dj's going to actually look at consumer law instead of just accepting what these idiots representing these companies say...the last line was a classic...you are dealing with a large credit card company who know what they need to know....unbelievable!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

O.K. time to stop sulking.......

 

Heres how it went.

 

Last hearing d.j. was shown that the T&C's were not the correct ones as Cabrot were saying they were.

 

At the Last Hearing he said that subject to Cabot supplying the correct T&C's from the Agreement, then he was "Happy that the (application form ), "agreement", was properley executed..

 

I had argued that, the T&C's show the wrong APR and Default charges. these being £18, ( they had allways been £24. on the statements.). I also pointed out that an entry from the "raw data action log", stated that the T&C's sent, were from Sept '06.

 

Cabot put in a W.S. that they had investigated this matter, unfortunatley they were only able to put forward the T&C's supplied by the original creditor, who has now supplied the correct ones.

 

Low and behold !,,, Cabot produced T&C's stating the charges would be £24.. However,

 

These T&C's were for Visa platinum, and Visa premium accounts, and printed proudly on the end was, " MONUMENT" also, the APR was incorrect.

They should have been for just a "PROVIDIAN Visa"

 

I showed his nibs this, and stood back....

 

Yes I see Mr Fussalot.. BUT. They would have been supplied at the time so I will accept that the agreement is "GOOD", AND,, AND, I will not be returning to this again, is that clear ?.. ( OUCH )

 

Oh well, here we go again....

 

I have not been shown a valid Notice of Assignment, in the Deed of Sale there is no mention that it applies to this account.

 

After he asked Cabrots "man", who explained that as they purchase up to 5oo accounts in any one time it is not practical to print each account as it could be against the Data Protection Act....

 

D.J....Mr. Fussalot, are you seriously expecting Cabot to print 5oo names and accounts, and then blank them out execpt for yours ?

 

No sir, I just wanted the proof of a Notice of Assignment.

 

We look at the letter in the trial bundle from Barclays to Cabrot ( see post 357 ) for the letter they used in court.

 

Do you accept that a sale was made mr Fussalot ?

 

Well, not from that letter sir....

 

Oh, and why would that be not acceptable to you ?

 

Well its looks to me like a photo copy of what Cabrot could have just printed off, as there is no headed "Barclays" on what is supposed to be their letter, And I can't see a name from Barclays ......

 

He then hit the roof...............

 

Mr Fussalot.. ( raised voice ).. I will not have you come in here alleging Fraud with no evidence to substansiate it.

 

YOU WERE SENT NOTICE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT AND THAT IS THE END OF THIS MATTER........

 

 

I do apologise... but I have to go to work..

I will continue later.

 

fussey.

 

 

Mine should have been PROVIDIAN

 

But he carried on

Edited by sir fussalot
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So in order to SUM UP..

 

 

 

D,J ruled that the prescribed t&c were probabably in the accompanying leaflet.

 

D.J ruled that D.N. was sent and was O.K. ( without seeing it )

 

D.J dissmissed previous court order saying that the documents were to be produced. ( saying that he had already dealt with them ).

 

So no documents have been produced, ie, Notice of Assignment.

 

Default notice. agreement with the prescribed terms.

 

D.J. ignored evidence in the " Raw Data " log supplied by Cabrots, that ,

" application form re-scanned and sent." regarding my CCA request.

 

If I appeal... what is the likelyhood of success..

 

pos, maybe, good very good.

 

sir fus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An appeal Judge couldnt let this mountain of misdirection pass him by, as long as you set you stall out properly...:D

 

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in order to SUM UP..

 

 

 

D,J ruled that the prescribed t&c were probabably in the accompanying leaflet.

 

D.J ruled that D.N. was sent and was O.K. ( without seeing it )

 

D.J dissmissed previous court order saying that the documents were to be produced. ( saying that he had already dealt with them ).

 

So no documents have been produced, ie, Notice of Assignment.

 

Default notice. agreement with the prescribed terms.

 

D.J. ignored evidence in the " Raw Data " log supplied by Cabrots, that ,

" application form re-scanned and sent." regarding my CCA request.

 

If I appeal... what is the likelyhood of success..

 

pos, maybe, good very good.

 

sir fus.

 

i am no expert - but i'd say that the chances of success a very high

 

so much so in fact that you may want to tout it around a few CFA lawyers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...