Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Okay, perfect. they did say BS is invoked as soon as i fill in their application form, ill get a pin. i had to press them more on this as they didnt want to discuss BS much. so i should fill in the form and get the pin, then i can initiate BS. What will follow and what should i do after? Thanks again for all the help and patience.
    • Good evening, so not a good weekend reviewing paperwork -- I have lost some proofs of postage.. also, although not provided at CCA, they have now supplied a DN in their WS, please see scan of claimants WS (without statements) Document with tick boxes as signatures doesn't look like an agreement and is split across pages. Documents have been stapled and copied multiple times looking at the top left of them. Aside from that, having read other threads, I suspect they have everything? appreciate your input please Sorry for heavy redactions, I noticed the paperwork was see-through LinkHalifaxCC1.compressed.pdf
    • Received a final demand today Final demand.pdf
    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        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 wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants 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.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are 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 its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
    • Only trying to help.  Ain't being nasty.  Some
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

sainsburys credit card CCA return - now sold to cabot


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2389 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

very common trick

 

there is a large thread here somewhere

showing the ages of the different logos etc

 

i think we found out some of them were using stuff 5-6yrs old

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

ims..I am unsure about there being a licensed agreement.as you say why do they bother if they (OC) dont have to provide one

 

dx..You are right the current DCA version of Halifax logo is at least 1 year old that has been sent to me.

 

 

casper.

Exactly what I mean,

it is deception in my book,

but ims21 may be correct,

but I will chase this further

 

Thanks FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

QUESTION..many of us have had the experience from more than one DCA (debt purchaser),where they the DCA has provided Letters of Assignment on the OCs headed notepaper, but it is so obvious they the DCA have been the author of the Assignment not the OC.

 

By using a photocopy of the OCs letterhead and passing it of as coming from the OC surely this is fraud??????????

 

FS

 

It won't be fraud in the true sense of the word if they have permission from the OC/companiy with the original letterhead.

 

If I have understood you corrently - it might just be when a creditor sells a debt they give the DCA permission to send out letters under their letter head where necessary to save themthe hassle of doing it themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IF the OC has given permission. At least some of the time they appear not to know about this practice. A couple of years go, a lot of us suddenly got NOAs on Santander headed paper on what turned out to be alleged debts from the late 80s which were Stat Barred many times over. We soon discovered that they were from CapQuest, and another Cagger asked Santander if they knew that CQ were sending them. I seem to recall that they were not at all pleased. As far as I know, after Santander were contacted about it, none of us ever heard another peep from CQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a dca can send a letter on another creditors letter head, there for could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up, some how dont seem fair to me. And please dont some one say all dca are honest and trust worthy and wouldn't dream of it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Casper ..Huff&puff thanks for your replies,

the more I think about this the more it concerns me that this practice even exists.

 

It would allow DCAs to be dishonest,allow them to make threats etc.

 

Nothing new then?

 

FS

 

To allow DCAs the right to send OC Assignments on their behalf is so dangerous and as you all state they can put in any amount and catch out unsuspecting debtors,

 

this should be looked into as a matter of urgency.

 

If DCAs where trustworthy it may not be an issue.

 

We are all aware DCAs do not qualify in any shape or form for the meaning of the word trustworthy.

 

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

so basically a dca can send a letter on another creditors letter head, there for could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up, some how dont seem fair to me. And please dont some one say all dca are honest and trust worthy and wouldn't dream of it

"could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up"

 

wel lthen it would be blatant fraud and they should be in deep ****.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice would be to inform the OC that some other organisation is using their letterheads and see hat reaction you get. As previously mentioned might be unaware of the practice.

 

The more that complain....

 

Intend

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got letter No2 from 1st Credit after ignoring Letter 1 which included the Halifax Assignment in the same envelope(have written to Halifax asking for their copy of their Assignment,and under separate cover have written to Halifax addressed to person whose name appears on the very doubtful Assignment purporting to have been written by Halifax)

 

Letter 2 is "the you have not responded to our first letter,we are considering issuing County Court Proceedings and they will claim all legal costs,make an application to my employer for earnings attachment (I am retired) application for seizure of assets by County Court Bailiff ,and a charging order on my property (I rent)..

 

I have in writing that Halifax do not have a copy of the signed agreement

 

What letter should I send? Have not paid the for nearly 3years(OC) and Halifax have been in Default for nearly 3 years

 

have read undercovers elsa attachment so selling the debt whilst in dispute not a good option to fight

 

Should it be a PROVE IT letter,or do I start a CCA all over again with 1st credit????

 

Thankyou FS

Edited by firstship
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Firstship,

How's this to start with:

I am most suprised to hear that Halifax has sold you this disputed debt in the full knowledge that they have admitted to me in writing that it is unenforceable by the courts as they do not have a copy of a signed agreement. They are therefore in permanent default of a formal request under s 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as such this account cannot be enforced in court.

In view of this your threat of taking court action is misleading, as are your statements that you will obtain an attachement of earnings / send in bailiffs / get a Charging Order on my property. (Although as I rent I don't think my Landlord would be agreeable).

I feel your statements are in contravention of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, 2008 which can be a Criminal Offence, and the OFT debt collection guidelines, and if you persist with these unfounded threats I will have no alternative but to report you to the relevant authorities.

I respectfully suggest that you return this account to the original owners, with which it remains in longstanding unresolved dispute.

 

 

(As ever, don't sign it, just type your name and squiggle your initials over the typing)

Elsa x

 

 

PS: Again for ref, I attach the CPUTR guidelines and OFT s77-79 request Guidelines

oft-cputr-guide.pdf

OFT-section77-79Requests.pdf

Edited by Undercover-Elsa
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Elsa Many thanks for your reply ,just what I need,I will get this letter away this weekend,appreciate your time given to this thread

 

Have downloaded your attatchments for future reference

 

Regards FS

 

I sent the Undercover-Elsa letter and have received 2 replies.(1) offering 30% discount if I pay within 7 days,20% discount if I pay within 30 days etc etc

 

Letter 2 is

"We refer to your recent communication requesting a copy of the relevant agreement.

The document you have requested is retained by our client.

We will therefore advise them of your request and arrange for the document to be sent to you as soon as possible.,(the rest of the letter is of no consequence)

 

Question if this 1st Credit mob have purchased the debt why do they have to refer back to Halifax and use such phrases as,"The document I have requested is retained by our client" Surely,if they purchased the debt then Halifax is no longer their client

 

Anyway I did not ask for a copy of the relevant agreement,Halifax already state in writing they dont have one.I guess a Recon Agreement is coming my way.

 

Regards FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi... 1st Credit.Been quiet for some time,now I have received copies of statements going back to 2004 which they say I requested,I did not request anything,and they say I need to phone them on receipt,to discuss the debt.

 

My thoughts are to send all the statements back along with a letter "I did not request these statements" they refer to an account that I do not acknowledge,and it appears from previous correspondence,that you are still trying to obtain a copy of the original agreement,which going back to February 2009, Halifax could not produce,and the account was placed into dispute, which in turn means that Halifax sold you an account that was in deep dispute, which to say the least is a very doubtful practice.

 

Any thoughts on the way forward

 

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Firstship

 

You will find plenty of threads about Statutory Demands on here, I haven't read any for a while so perhaps 42man can assist.

I am receiving daily calls on land and mobile from these pests!

 

Have you got some links 42man please?

 

I haven't responded to 1st credit yet but if they are issuing SD's I would like to be prepared!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dotty thanks have had a read on Stat Demands,has'nt reached the SD stage yet with 1stCredit,they have just been quiet from middle of last year,at which time they said they would approach the OC to obtain a copy of the Agreement,which I know does not exist,confirmed in writing by the OC.Then out of the blue I get copies of all statements going back 6 years which they say I asked for,but did'nt.,no copy of any agreement though.

 

I hope it just stays like this,no agreement

 

Thanks FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Firstship,

The fact that you don't own property should make a stat demand pretty pointless...except as a debt threat tool which of course they've been censured for previously.

If they pester you again just remind them that Hx are still in default of a CCA Request and you have written confirmation that they cannot produce an agreement. Mention that you don't own any property if they start threatening Stat Demands, CCJ's or Charging Orders, and suggest that as Hx were fully aware that this was a seriously disputed debt they should either return it to them or stop making spurious threats and close the account.

 

Elsa x

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st Credit have already started and threatened court and have stated that as they cannot at this point produce an Agreement,not to worry as in Court they do not have to produce a Copy of the original Agreement with my signature,it will be sufficient to produce a copy of the Original Agreement without my signature,.I think this is untrue.

 

My only concern is that certain courts are happy with statements,and a recon agreement

 

Any thoughts

 

The above was the result of a phone call from 1stcredit,I stated that is the only conversation we will have,in future everything must be in writing.

 

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...