Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
    • cause like you said in post one, 99% of people think these are FINES (it now reads charge). and wet themselves and cough up. they are not, they are speculative invoices because the driver supposedly broke some imaginary contract by driving onto privately owned land which said owner may or may not have signed some 99% fake contract with a private parking co years ago, thats already expired or has not been renewed or annually paid to employ them dx  
  • 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

Varde Investments, Experto Credite & Overseas Companies


Guest HeftyHippo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4238 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

Guest HeftyHippo

There are a couple of threads sprung up recently about MBNA selling debts to Varde Investments Ireland Ltd. Usually the first news of this is a letter from Experto (who are owned by Varde) explaining this and stating that they act for Varde.

 

It's been suggested that such a sale could not result in enforcement because Varde does not have a UK Credit Licence as required by the 1974 CCA, and Experto although having a licence does not own the debt and so cannot act. Without seeing the actual agreement, it's not possible to say if it allows the intervention of any third party.

 

In my thread about my MBNA debt, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/238117-mbna-experto-credite-accounts-6.html#post2709293 I suggest that Varde could get a UK credit licence for less than £1000.

 

However, I've come across something else. I didn't want to put it in my thread because obviously I want to get advice on my situation in there rather than have it turn into a discussion about legislation etc. Also, it may be useful and applicable to others on here, and relevant to other creditors and debt buyers so a central discussion seems better. I haven't read all of the following documents, nor any others that may be relevant, so if you know something feel free to say it.

 

If you look at "Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 3275 The Investment Services Regulations 1995" see it HERE

 

section 4 says:

Authorised services

4. For the purposes of these Regulations a European investment firm is authorised to provide in its home State any listed service which its authorisation as an investment firm or as a credit institution authorises it to provide.

That bit seems to be a circular statement, but defines a 'European investment firm'.

 

section 5 says:

Effect of recognition

Authorisations and licences not required

5.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2) below, nothing in the following enactments, namely—

  • (a) sections 3 and 4 of the Financial Services Act (restrictions on carrying on investment business); and

 

shall prevent a European investment firm from providing in the United Kingdom any listed service which it is authorised to provide in its home State.

 

(2) In relation to a European investment firm in respect of which a prohibition under these Regulations is in force—

  • (a) paragraph (1)(a) above shall not apply if the prohibition is under regulation 9 below; and

 

  • (b) paragraph (1)(b) above shall not apply if the prohibition is under regulation 15 below.

The 'prohibition' mentioned refers to prohibiting persons who have committed things such as fraud that makes them unfit to have a licence.

 

The parts of CCA1974 mentioned above:

21.-(1) Subject to this section, a licence is required to carry

on a consumer credit business or consumer hire business.

39.-(1) A person who engages in any activities for which a

licence is required when he is not a licensee under a licence

covering those activities commits an offence.

(2) A licensee under a standard licence who carries on

business under a name not specified in the licence commits an

offence.

(3) A person who fails to give the Director or a licensee notice

under section 36 within the period required commits an offence

Licensing

147.-(1) The provisions of Part III (except section 40) apply

to an ancillary credit business as they apply to a consumer

credit business.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of section 26, regula

tions under that section (as applied by subsection (1)) may

include provisions regulating the collection and dissemination of

information by credit reference agencies.

Part III deals with granting of licensing, conditions of licences, procedures etc

 

 

So essentially, for our purposes (ignoring the investment side), if a company is allowed to undertake credit and debt related activities at home, and they are 'fit and proper' then they are allowed to perform the same activities in the UK, are subject to the same rules but do not need a UK credit licence.

 

That means they can share info with CRAs and pursue debts through the courts in the same way as a UK company can.

 

Now, overseas debt collection is more expensive than collecting at home, but Varde has a UK 'wing' Experto, already set up and active.

 

Now, Varde don't have any more power than any other DCA, but we seem to have enough as it is and probably don't need any more, unless they're going to be a replacement rather than an addition, and I don't think that's the case!

 

That's my interpretation, but I'd welcome others.

Edited by HeftyHippo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be worth asking the OFT the specific question

 

'If a company has a consumer credit licence for another EU state, do they need a licence for the UK?'

 

I think this is a very important point to clarify, since if MBNA are selling stuff 'overseas' you can guarantee everyone else will start doing it eventually. I bet there's some tax advantage or something.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HeftyHippo
Would it be worth asking the OFT the specific question

 

'If a company has a consumer credit licence for another EU state, do they need a licence for the UK?'

 

I think this is a very important point to clarify, since if MBNA are selling stuff 'overseas' you can guarantee everyone else will start doing it eventually. I bet there's some tax advantage or something.

 

well the OFT website says they don't give advice to the public. I tried consumer direct who said an overseas company could enforce a debt in a UK court.

 

The legislation I quote above seems pretty clear to me unless my interpretation is wrong.

 

I am sure there's a tax break somewhere, and also that others may be tempted to sell overseas as well eventually.(particularly if GAGGERS continue to beat the existing debt buyers so they lose interest in buying any more dodgy 'debts' LOL. New, gullible buyers would be needed lol)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting info hefty,

unfortunately for Varde even though the alleged debts are now owned by an international company, they are still covered by UK law. So if they ever took it to court in the UK they are still bound by the CCA 1974.

 

If the debts were absolute assignment they need to produce evidence of delivery of said notice this is "Law of Property Act 1925 s136". Basically you need to be served said notice by registered mail prior to the sale by the original company. If its served in this way basically is an equatable assignment only, if this is the case both Varde and Mbn@ have to take you to court.

 

The facts are the alleged debts have no valid CCA, no valid DN and are unlawfully rescinded they can chase all they want but they cannot collect. If they decide to take anyone to court they are fools they will lose before they enter the gate. And knowing old MBN@ peoples alleged debts are £5k+ and hence cost quite a bit to take to court.

 

I don't believe anything can make it go away until they are statute barred.

 

Too be honest Exspurto are either very inept or are just collecting off lots of poor souls that don't know differently. From their current track record Exspurto cannot be bothered to chase people in the know so to speak, they cannot even be bothered to answer letters.

 

Safely store and scan your documents.

 

Pumpytums

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too be honest Exspurto are either very inept or are just collecting off lots of poor souls that don't know differently. From their current track record Exspurto cannot be bothered to chase people in the know so to speak, they cannot even be bothered to answer letters.

 

Never hear from them - they just ignore me now :D

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HeftyHippo
Interesting info hefty,

unfortunately for Varde even though the alleged debts are now owned by an international company, they are still covered by UK law. So if they ever took it to court in the UK they are still bound by the CCA 1974.

Yes, I make the point above that they are still bound by the 1974 Act

 

If the debts were absolute assignment they need to produce evidence of delivery of said notice this is "Law of Property Act 1925 s136". Basically you need to be served said notice by registered mail prior to the sale by the original company.

Yes, that's been said by some, and disputed by others. I can't find anywhere where the requirement to serve by recorded delivery is stated. If recorded delievery was a requirment, that would mean hand delivery by server was not allowed - personal service is usually the most favoured/reliable method but isn't widely used because of cost.

 

The facts are the alleged debts have no valid CCA, no valid DN and are unlawfully rescinded they can chase all they want but they cannot collect. If they decide to take anyone to court they are fools they will lose before they enter the gate. And knowing old MBN@ peoples alleged debts are £5k+ and hence cost quite a bit to take to court.

 

I don't believe anything can make it go away until they are statute barred.

Yes, standard CCA and contract law

 

Too be honest Exspurto are either very inept or are just collecting off lots of poor souls that don't know differently. From their current track record Exspurto cannot be bothered to chase people in the know so to speak, they cannot even be bothered to answer letters.

No diferent from any other DCA, except if they don't pursue people who know the law, maybe they're not that inept, so maybe their ineptitude should not be taken for granted?

 

What you say is generally true, its all standard law. The point I'm making is that my interpretation is that a company based in Europe can pursue debts in the UK. Previously it's been stated that that is not possible. I think it is, and simply wanted to put an interpretation of the law based on actually reading the legislation in this arena to counter the other point of view that seems to be based on speculation and interpretation of other laws rather than legislation aimed directly at this scenario.

 

This legislation appears to override certain aspects of the CCA1974.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HeftyHippo

I don't want this thread to be dragged off course about standard things dealt with elsewhere but would like it to be concentrated on the possibility of Debts being sold overseas.

 

However, the argument is that s196 says that sufficient service can be achieved by sending a registered letter. It doesn't say that ordinary post is not sufficient service. If the intention was to require registered post v ordinary post, the Act would say that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Hefty back on track,

check out the following link

 

Channel Islands Stock Exchange - Listed Security Detail - VPRSSNRN - VP Resi Ltd Details

 

Details of Registration - Data Protection Commissioner - Ireland

 

this is VP vesi LTD same address as ViiL (varde) and listed on the Channel Islands Stock Exchange.

 

So this is where MBN@ junk ends up.

 

Pumpytums

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want this thread to be dragged off course about standard things dealt with elsewhere but would like it to be concentrated on the possibility of Debts being sold overseas.

 

However, the argument is that s196 says that sufficient service can be achieved by sending a registered letter. It doesn't say that ordinary post is not sufficient service. If the intention was to require registered post v ordinary post, the Act would say that.

 

ftp://ftp.royalmail.com/Downloads/public/ctf/rm/ILPSchemeApril2009RH.pdf

 

 

Special Delivery Letter

A Letter sent using the Special Delivery service as set out in section 40 of this Scheme. Any

reference in any legislation or legal document to “Registered Post“ or “the Registered Service“ shall

be taken to be a reference to Special Delivery as it is the same service in all material respects

 

Sorry to drag it off course but this is important.

 

 

Pumpytums

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HeftyHippo
Ok Hefty back on track,

check out the following link

 

Channel Islands Stock Exchange - Listed Security Detail - VPRSSNRN - VP Resi Ltd Details

 

Details of Registration - Data Protection Commissioner - Ireland

 

this is VP vesi LTD same address as ViiL (varde) and listed on the Channel Islands Stock Exchange.

 

So this is where MBN@ junk ends up.

 

Pumpytums

 

well there's probably a right tangled international web effectively exporting money through many tax jurisdictions.

 

doesn't really make any difference though does it? As long as they abide by the CCA and other laws here, my interpretation of the above legislation is that they can pursue debts here. Thing is, they're outside our jurisdiction, so if it comes to harassing behaviour, refusal to correct inaccurate data with CRAs, it won't be easy to take action against them, so we're left with the likes of the Data Commissioner, OFT etc, who can't even regulate debt collectors in their own backyard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Hefty back on track,

check out the following link

 

Channel Islands Stock Exchange - Listed Security Detail - VPRSSNRN - VP Resi Ltd Details

 

Details of Registration - Data Protection Commissioner - Ireland

 

this is VP vesi LTD same address as ViiL (varde) and listed on the Channel Islands Stock Exchange.

 

So this is where MBN@ junk ends up.

 

Pumpytums

 

I wonder where to next! this gets more complicated.

 

Has anyone come across VP Vesi before?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am not sure but i think under the ratification act in eu that has just been passed into uk law in the last two weeks touches on this ,but also they may/will need a uk consumers credit licence otherwise it may be subject to the money laundering act...

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/231293-help-defence-ws-required-24.html#post2714113

 

have a read through the thread it is a long one but well worth it to see what pointers you need for the asignments to be valid and for an overseas company to be able to prosecute vj nailed them so it is possible to tie this lot up in legal work ...good luck will keep my eye on this thread see if i can add anything

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 11 months later...
  • 5 months later...

Hi

 

Did anyone ever get anywhere with this?

 

I have received a court claim today from Varde for 2 MBNA accounts I have!

 

Threads here...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?205720-Cupcakes-Vs-Mbna-You/page2

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?198121-cupcake68-Vs-A-amp-L

 

I am searching the forums looking for relevant info.

 

Also not sure if they are allowed to add the two together like this and not sure if the fact the POC's are incomplete puts me in a strong position or not

 

Any advice gratefully received.

 

Just had a baby and my already mushy mind is true mush right now!!

 

Cupcake

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have just filed my defence in court for Varde the failed to turn up or enter a jughment I have a stay on my CCJ at the moment waiting for them to come back with a reply...I sent them a s78 request and CPR request forms they have as yet been unable to provide any documents??? Lets see what they can come up with>>>>

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

All those searching for an answer to MBNA SELLING debts to Varde Investments, try not that the debt has been sold,but the

 

right of claim has been sold. MBNA parent company is the Bank of America.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...