Jump to content

Daniel Silverman - NKOTB? CPR 31.16 appropriate?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4178 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

NKOTB - New kid on the block? Not heard of this firm before... seems they like the direct approach.


Anyway... here is a letter my next door neighbour received on Friday... been so busy with my stuff that I haven't had chance to look at it. Anyway... here is the letter he recieved and what I am sending back... thoughts appreciated :-)








Here's what they are having back...


Dear Sir/Madam,


I am writing to you regarding a letter you sent dated 9th November 2009. In the interests of clarity I do not acknowledge the debt you are requesting I take responsibility for. The letter I received states that you are intending to take court action and that legal papers have been drafted.


I must point out that the debt is in dispute. However, since you have ignored that fact, I shall draw your attention to the following.


Under the Civil Procedure Rules 31.16 the following applies:


(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where –

(a) the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

(b) the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

(d) disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

(i) dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

(ii) assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

(iii) save costs.


Therefore I am requesting you disclose all of the documents you intend to rely upon as drafted in your legal papers so that I may have the chance to inspect them and present an opportunity to settle this dispute without proceedings.. If you refuse to comply with this request then I shall make an order to the County Court which will incur costs to you.


If indeed you have not drafted legal papers then I believe this constitutes vexatious behaviour which is cause of complaint under section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970. I shall also seek to complain to the Financial Ombudsman because I believe you to be in contravention of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance which states the following paragraphs:



b. falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally cannot and;



h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed


I think I have made the position quite clear and I expect for the CPR request to be handled with care for due process. I believe that as you have already drafted legal papers with the appropriate information on the Particulars of Claim that you have the documentation to hand to reasonably deal with this request within 14 days.


If you do not comply with this request I shall write to the court and prepare a schedule of costs related to the drafting of this letter which have been incurred by me as a Litigant in Person.


Please note the Practice Direction supplement to part 31 of the CPR.


Bit tired of firms claiming legal papers have been drafted... that must cost a lot of money no? Ok... well we have to do the same then surely... so if they don't have the docs... then they should pay our costs surely?


Well the logic is reasonable I guess lol

Link to post
Share on other sites



2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear,

inaccurate or misleading manner.

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead

debtors as to their status, for example, documents made to resemble court


b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors'

lack of knowledge."

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniels Silverman have appeared on CAG before. Indeed, in a couple of cases a poster purporting to be their MD has been on to apologise for non-compliant actions.


They are no different to any other DCA - i.e. non-compliant, legally impotent and reliant on people not knowing their rights or the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Have a butchers at this...




I thought this type of credit file searching was prohibited by the DPA 1998 as it is excessive for the purpose in which the data is being used.


If you are going to take litigation proceedings I always thought it should be on the strength of your case and not upon whether a prospective defendant has certain info on their credit file.


I suppose a case could be made for a firm wanting to know the likelihood of repayment/recovery...


What do you all think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi vjohn82,


Maybe a phone call to the information Commissioners Office tomorrow, if you need to put in a defence could prove useful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a favourite phrase of hamptons this one:D


also seen it from hl legal.



had the exact statement from westcott.not a sol but bloody cheek of them.

wrote and told them that if they were chashing a VALID debt then they should already be aware of what litigation action they can or can not take.


and considering the fact that they had already been a prying on my cf 3 times they should be aware whats on there.


never heard back, 3 years now.







Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...