Halifax Court Action No Default Notice Received - Help!

[lilly white]

Consumer Credit Act 1974 This version of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has simply been scanned in from a printed copy.

[middenmess]

Thanks lily-understood,thanks for explaining it by example.

 

 

I've read many hundreds of posts on the forums but haven't come across that argument [fact] before-it's either because I've missed it somehow or that it hasn't had a wide exposure.

 

Compared with many of the points put forward on here when disputing alleged 'agreements' this would seem to be a much stronger legal argument to use.

[darknight]

The initial credit limit was 500, which in the table on the first page. But as Lilly says, an application form is not a CCA. Section 59 (1) seems quite clear, in that an application form is not a CCA. This is news to me as well. As middenmess mentioned, this single defect is enough to have the alleged agreement voided, and therefore there would be no case to answer. As you say middenmess, I have not come across this either. Are there are case laws that would support this ? This is a very interesting angle.

[darknight]

I don't think I would be confident in attending the hearing myself. How would I go about finding a barrister ?

[vjohn82]

As Lil says we need to see the POC...

 

Case law is vague on this particular point (section 59) because I think any lender that would have been challenged by it would have discontinued prior to any hearing.

[middenmess]

As Lil says we need to see the POC...

 

Case law is vague on this particular point (section 59) because I think any lender that would have been challenged by it would have discontinued prior to any hearing.

 

 

FAO Lilly---Referring to darknights post above,what was the result of the defence that you posted at post 25 regarding Section 59?

Edited November 17, 2009 by middenmess
missed out a word

[hungrybear]

Yes, what Halifax are saying is that the 'ND000001' reference on the screen refers to the default notice being sent out wow one refernce to prove authorised, qued for printing, printed, and posted. If you look at all the evidence, how can anyone deduce from that, that the actual default notice was sent out.....they can'tNo but if your not careful they'll steamroller the DJ into believing it. I have already told Halifax that they will be put to strict proof of the existence of a valid default notice. I think they are relying on me not turning up for the hearing and getting judgement by default. Either that or turning up and not knowing your $rse from your elbow

 

Would I have a better chance, if I had Barrister fighting my corner ? I know it will cost me, but if helps in putting my case forward and getting it across to the DJ, then it may be worth it ? IF your are fighting over a large amount and/or if you feel you may crumble then clearly a barrister or an experienced solicitor (partner) from a large local firm is an option

 

On the application form, there is a right to cancel box just above the signature box ? Are you saying that should have been within in the signature box ?No I'm saying that it is not specific and refers to another communication from them. This is too vague.

 

The credit limit, may have been one of the ones on the front page, but I can't remember, will have a look at the previous statements. Doesn't it say in the CCA that they can omit a specific credit limit, and they can say something like 'we will determine the credit liit from time to time' ?There is No direct reference to a credit limit on the application form is there? And the apr vs limit would require a specific limit on that document that was listed in the table for there to be an APR.

 

Would I put the swearing on oath bit into my witness statement that I will need to do for the hearing The defendant is prepared to swear on oath that.....? And would I then in the hearing swear on oath ? Also would I put Halifax to strict proof of the existence of the default notice at the hearing ? In your defense you put them to strict proof to produce the original in court If all they are relying on is the computer screen printout and the blank DN template, then they would fail in proving categorically that a valid DN existed and sent out to me. So then since this legal action was based on me not complying with a default notice that never existed, would mean that the case would be thrown out ? Would this be fair comment ? At worst they could claim the amount in the default notice and no more.

 

A huge thanks for all the replies.

DK

 

 

I would have a look through a few threads if I were you and find a member of the site team 'you like the look of' and PM them with a link to go through this. Just to be on the safe side

[lilly white]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/166878-my-mrs-barclaycard.html

 

HAPPYS DAYS I GIVE YOU OUR OWN PAUL WALTON

[darknight]

The claim form is below, showing the POC :

 

http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq126/darknight_man/Halifax%20CCA/POC.jpg

 

Note that in the last line, they say "The balance due as at 0// on said account is xxxxxxx."

 

There is no date, where it says that the balance due as at..... There should be a valid date in there.

[hungrybear]

this looks like semi automated bull droppings to me. IMO a bemused defense on the grounds that their poc is meaningless is in order.

[darknight]

Their claim is based on the default notcie that they allege that sent to me.

If they can't prove that there was a valid default notice, then they have no claim, as their POC state that I have not complied with the DN.

 

The default notice gives you 14 days to comply, after which they can terminate the account and demand the full balance.

This is what they are claiming.

The abscence of a date in the last line of the POC provides ammunition that they never had a default notice, which is why they have no date in the POC.

 

I only noticed that there was no date last night when I scanned the POC.