HP Trouble - Claim form issued.

[gareth19]

Ok just an update. The court still maintains that the aq was sent due to the fact Morgan's informed them I would likely be defending the claim. The court says now it issued it must be returned by 20th Sept so looks like we're stuck with that. I have sent CPR31.15 letter to Morgan's as well as a copy of my defence. I have also sent a copy of my defence to the court. All were sent today by recorded mail so I guess we'll just wait and see what happens next.

[gh2008]

Well, I agree with EMC and think you should write to the Court Manager and complain. In that letter include the fact that because of *their* actions you have been rushed into submitting a defence and that your case is already severely prejudiced especially as you are a Litigant in Person.

 

Terrible behaviour .......

 

I would also consider reporting Morgans to the SRA. I am sure that is not approved practice ....

[gh2008]

I'm going to be busy for a few days so, my thoughts re the AQ would be to submit special directions along the lines of

 

1. The Claimant will replead their case with a POC fully complying with CPR16 (and any others as appropriate)

 

2. The Defendant will file and serve a fully particularised defence 21 days thereafter (normally 14 days, but you need extra time as LiP and prejudiced by procedure already)

 

3. Unless the Claimant complies with this Order the claim shall be struck out without further Order

 

IMHO at this stage you DO NOT want to be asking for documents to be relied on etc - what you want is the actual case against you - you need to know how they think they have a claim against you.

 

Then you will be able to answer it.

[foolishgirl]

Well, I agree with EMC and think you should write to the Court Manager and complain. In that letter include the fact that because of *their* actions you have been rushed into submitting a defence and that your case is already severely prejudiced especially as you are a Litigant in Person.

 

Terrible behaviour .......

 

I would also consider reporting Morgans to the SRA. I am sure that is not approved practice ....

 

Agree, terrible behaviour of the court & a complaint in writing to the Court Manager asap.

 

However I don't think it's an SRA matter re. Morgans. If the court let them get away with this, IMO it's the court admin that is totally out of order not Morgans. It's hard enough to get the SRA to take action on any legitimate complaint let alone one like this so IMO you'd be wasting a stamp but the court, most definitely yes.

 

We seem to be hearing more of court admin errors on CAG & the LIP seems to be at their mercy. Unfortunately I fear it will only get worse as the legal system is squeezed of resources from central govt.

 

BTW good directions gh

[citizenB]

apologies for the delay, here is the agreement. CLick on it for a larger view.

 

[citizenB]

It isnt for Morgans to advise the court of your intentions. I wonder if the court would have "discontinued the claim" had you phoned and advised that Morgans were likely not to pursue ??

 

They have actually deprived you of 7 days to prepare a defence.

[emandcole]

Thanks CB. Seems clear that if the debtor wishes to terminate the contract, and Terminate is the word used by them (not surrender) that they should return the goods and if half of the debt has not yet been paid the creditor is entitled to the goods and half of the Total Amount Payable.

 

In the alternative if the debtor has returned the goods and paid more than half of the Total Amount Payable, subject to the goods being in good condition the debtor has no more to pay.

 

Presumably then Gareth had not yet paid half of the TAP so returned the car under VT and commenced payment of half the TAP. We could do with having the figures checked over really, can't quite make out the three totals to the left of the form but it looks as if an Extended Warranty was also taken.

 

Be good to know if this Extended Warranty cost (that was subject to 20.53% APR ??) was also subjected to further interest when it was added into the main loan figures...I might be off the plot here but worth a look. Also interesting to see the Consumer Credit Act at the top of the agreement has no year, small matter but what else have they potentially missed out?

 

Gareth - do you know how much you've paid to date, does this tie in with what they're asking for (eg the difference between half the TAP and the amount you've already paid) and if not how much more are they asking for?

[foolishgirl]

Be good to know if this Extended Warranty cost (that was subject to 20.53% APR ??) was also subjected to further interest when it was added into the main loan figures...I might be off the plot here but worth a look. Also interesting to see the Consumer Credit Act at the top of the agreement has no year, small matter but what else have they potentially missed out?

 

Hmm... methinks they may wish they'd never picked this fight by the time you're through, gareth.

[emandcole]

Thanks for the rep again CB - still won't let me add to yours though! I owe you for a few bits and pieces

[gareth19]

Thanks CB. Seems clear that if the debtor wishes to terminate the contract, and Terminate is the word used by them (not surrender) that they should return the goods and if half of the debt has not yet been paid the creditor is entitled to the goods and half of the Total Amount Payable.

 

In the alternative if the debtor has returned the goods and paid more than half of the Total Amount Payable, subject to the goods being in good condition the debtor has no more to pay.

 

Presumably then Gareth had not yet paid half of the TAP so returned the car under VT and commenced payment of half the TAP. We could do with having the figures checked over really, can't quite make out the three totals to the left of the form but it looks as if an Extended Warranty was also taken.

 

Be good to know if this Extended Warranty cost (that was subject to 20.53% APR ??) was also subjected to further interest when it was added into the main loan figures...I might be off the plot here but worth a look. Also interesting to see the Consumer Credit Act at the top of the agreement has no year, small matter but what else have they potentially missed out?

 

Gareth - do you know how much you've paid to date, does this tie in with what they're asking for (eg the difference between half the TAP and the amount you've already paid) and if not how much more are they asking for?

 

I am so glad you can now see the agreement. This is what I have tried telling Shoosmiths, Cabot and now Morgan's. Where is the option of VS? Nowhere which is why I'd never heard of it. I VT'd as per the agreement. As far as the figures are concerned - The total amount payable on the agreement was £14735.50. This means that when I VT'd they were entitled to 50% of that figure (£7367.80) minus what what the car sold for and minus any payments I had already made. The car sold for £600 and I have made £5603.07 so I owe the difference between £7367.80 and £6203.07 leaving £1164.73. I have told them all that this is the correct balance but nobody listens. They on the other hand say the balance I owe is a riduclous £8927.73 which they have also now just added a court fee of £190 and solicitor's costs of £100 so a grand total of £9217.73 is what they are now claiming. Way off the mark. As I have told them all, I do not dispute the debt, I dispute the balance.

[gareth19]

Hmm... methinks they may wish they'd never picked this fight by the time you're through, gareth.

 

I have always been supremely confident with my case as I believe it is watertight but I was not confident of how to portray this in court so things go to plan. I was worried I may say or do the wrong thing and mess it all up which is why I asked the advice of you good people.

[citizenB]

Seems to me as though you have every right to be confident As you say.. where is the option they claim you took? IOW, you would have only taken the option open to you

 

Nice one, batman

[emandcole]

Can you give us the details of the payments in the boxes, can't make them out clearly enough on the form.

[gareth19]

Can you give us the details of the payments in the boxes, can't make them out clearly enough on the form.

 

Yes. 1 is Total Cash Price £9,448.96. 2 is Finance deposit £100.00. 3 is amount financed £9,348.96. 4 is total charge for credit £5286.64. 5 is Balance Payable (3+4) £14,635.60. 6 is Total amount payable £14,635.60. 7 is APR 21.21%. Hope that helps!!

[gareth19]

Seems to me as though you have every right to be confident As you say.. where is the option they claim you took? IOW, you would have only taken the option open to you

 

Nice one, batman

 

To me it is an open and shut case but what will the jugde think that's the problem. To be honest I'm so surprised they have even taken it to court so they must think they have a case of some sort. All I've ever wanted is for them to either provide me with proof of a VS (as they maintain) or to update the balance to the correct balance of £1164.73. I informed them that as soon as they did that I would resume payments to them but no they decided to take it further....

[emandcole]

What you need to understand is that Morgans et al work in the shadows of consumer ignorance, the majority of people simply buckle at the thought of a court case. Further, the litigation route is too often used as a threat en masse by debt collectors, low rate solicitors and others who quite simply use the court system as a way to sort those who fight from those who haven't a clue.

 

It's a harsh term but 'rape of the ignorant and defenceless' really isn't too far from the reality. Once you've adopted this mindset and adjusted your perspective it rapidly becomes clear why claims such as yours are made. Luckily CAG is a vital resource and offers an olive branch to many

[gareth19]

What you need to understand is that Morgans et al work in the shadows of consumer ignorance, the majority of people simply buckle at the thought of a court case. Further, the litigation route is too often used as a threat en masse by debt collectors, low rate solicitors and others who quite simply use the court system as a way to sort those who fight from those who haven't a clue.

 

It's a harsh term but 'rape of the ignorant and defenceless really isn't too far from the reality. Once you've adopted this mindset and adjusted your perspective it rapidly becomes clear why claims such as yours are made. Luckily CAG is a vital resource and offers an olive branch to many

 

I tend to agree with that. I ask for answers and proof and they give me nothing. Instead preferring to start legal proceedings (I assume in the hope as you said that they will frighten people into submission). I am very hopeful of my case and I can not see what they intend to base their case on at all but all will be revealed. You're also correct in your endorsement of this site. It is a fantastic boost to know that their are people there willing to help. I for one will be making my donation to the site have no fear. In the meantine I still have to try and wipe the floor with this shower

[foolishgirl]

It's a harsh term but 'rape of the ignorant and defenceless' really isn't too far from the reality. Once you've adopted this mindset and adjusted your perspective it rapidly becomes clear why claims such as yours are made.

I so agree EMC.

 

There was a case that hit the headlines a couple of years ago (not Morgans but DCAs are nearly all the same) where a lady was harassed so much that she ended up paying instalments on a debt she had never owned, never even heard of & when it all got too much & they were trying to squeeze the last drop of blood, she committed suicide.

 

Of course there was the anticipated insincere sympathies expressed from the DCA & they did seem to back off for a while - maybe even a few days - but then it was business as usual.

 

You are not alone gareth, just hold tight.

[emandcole]

Had no idea about that FG. Without being melodramatic I guess we must remember that it's cases like this which wholly justify both the clear need & existence of CAG, I feel it's very easy to forget the bottom line when you go from thread to thread trying to do your bit. Love the irony of the Foolishgirl name by the way, great to read measured wisdom from a poster with such a title!

 

Going to have a look at these figures Gareth has posted, it's possible Morgans have bitten off more than they can chew so lets see how good this agreement actually is!

[emandcole]

Ok, just an initial calculation online but according to the checker I used the APR they have provided is wrong.

 

APR Calculator

 

Loan amount 9448.96

Starter / admin charge 341.51

Monthly repayment amount 241.51

Number of monthly repayments 58

Extra final charge 286.51

 

Results

 

APR 21.5%

 

Source: www.prudentminds.com/apr-calculator.html

 

If I've done this correctly the APR charged is actually higher by 0.4% and if this is the case the agreement is wholly worthless. APR accuracy states that the APR you pay can be up to 1.0% lower than the rate advertised, however the rate you pay cannot be more than 0.1% than that advertised as if it is you're basically being ripped off.

 

Anyone any good with APR calcs to verify the above is right?

Edited September 11, 2010 by emandcole

[foolishgirl]

Sorry can't help on calcs. I use an online checker too & I know they are not always 100% accurate.

Maybe try peterbard. He has a spreadsheet & his useful thread is here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?187938

[gareth19]

Ok, just an initial calculation online but according to the checker I used the APR they have provided is wrong.

 

APR Calculator

 

Loan amount 9448.96

Starter / admin charge 341.51

Monthly repayment amount 241.51

Number of monthly repayments 58

Extra final charge 286.51

 

Results

 

APR 21.5%

 

Source: www.prudentminds.com/apr-calculator.html

 

If I've done this correctly the APR charged is actually higher by 0.4% and if this is the case the agreement is wholly worthless. APR accuracy states that the APR you pay can be up to 1.0% lower than the rate advertised, however the rate you pay cannot be more than 0.1% than that advertised as if it is you're basically being ripped off.

 

Anyone any good with APR calcs to verify the above is right?

 

Good work! If that was the case and the agreement was proved to be worthless it would save all this aggro! Hopefully someone can confirm this to be the case!

[gareth19]

The letters which I sent recorded to Morgans regarding CPR31.15 and also my defence have not been responded to. I gave them 7 days and as my aq still has to be by 20th Sept they are cutting it fine for me to see any documents. What shall I do now as I don't want to miss the deadline for the aq?

[postggj]

Can you give a link to your defence

 

good work on the apr

[emandcole]

Hi post, good to have you on board.