Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you honeybee if you would my head is mashed now. You guys our savers.  H
    • You can edit the answers to be in red or would you like me to do it? HB
    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Asset Recoveries UK hassling re mortgage shortfall from 2000- ** Statute barred ** :)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4638 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

BUT I've read about 10 judgements this evening (both for and against the debtors) - I know how sad

and not one of them even tried to extend the 12 years from the 'default date'.

 

Just to point out IW this is speculation and debate where we are all learning and discussing - this is NOT relevant to your case at the moment - so relax :)

  • Haha 1

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 332
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Good post P1 :)

 

Maybe a SAR to the OC is required then ........

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BUT I've read about 10 judgements this evening (both for and against the debtors) - I know how sad

and not one of them even tried to extend the 12 years from the 'default date'.

 

 

If that is the case.... and I hope it is.... then it's looking much more positive for IW.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe a SAR to the OC is required then ........

 

Probably, yes.... 'coz I doubt that Aruk will back off on hearsay, so to speak.

 

Now we know it's been sold by Absolute Assignment though, there's no risk to her by getting in touch with the OC; as it's got nothing to with them anymore.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PriorityOne,

I would love to know just how ARUK are going to be able to prove that, the alleged debt is NOT statute barred?

 

Perhaps, ARUK would care to show the exact course that this securitized debt took on its travels?

 

Did the securitization take place through the UK? (equitable)

 

Did the debt seller obtain HMRC tax relief on the charge-off?

 

What about the interest?

 

How much interest was levied?

6 years?

or, more than 6 years?

 

Last question:

 

Was the consumer in question, treated fairly by the lender?

 

Who was the lender?

 

First National;

Britannic;

Mortgage Trust or;

another...

Link to post
Share on other sites

PriorityOne,

I would love to know just how ARUK are going to be able to prove that, the alleged debt is NOT statute barred?

 

 

I don't think Aruk will be able to prove anything at all actually ;)..... hence the cack response (to date) to the SAR, but that doesn't mean they'll back off in a hurry....

 

It'll be interesting to see what their next letter in response to IWs complaint tries to state though...

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another interesting read if this is indeed stat-barred....

 

Alternatively, the limitation period may have been extended by a part-payment made “in respect of” the debt. A part-payment is a species of acknowledgment. A part-payment will only have the effect of restarting the clock if it amounts to an admission that the balance of the debt remains due: Surrendra. The act and intention of the debtor are vitally important in considering whether the limitation period has been extended by a part-payment: Re Footman, Brewer & Co Ltd [1961] Ch 443. Indeed, if it appears from the circumstances that the debtor making the payment did not intend to admit that the whole or a particular part of the debt was due, it is arguable that this does not extend the limitation period in relation to the whole of the debt. The debtor must be actively involved in the part-payment. This is why time does not begin again on the sale of the property and payment of proceeds of sale to the bank.

 

Presumably, this is what Aruk were trying to be adamant about in previous correspondence; that the period of limitation began on the point of sale/transfer of funds. Not so... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they took this to court at the present moment, how exactly would they expect to win with absolutely no paperwork and clear evidence that they and the Luxemburgers have obstructed the debtor in their legitimate attempts to clarify the status of the alleged debt.

 

Up to now, they have refuted that the internet is a viable source of reference and any information found there is somehow inadmissable

 

They have refuted that the debt is statute barred, but have made no attempt to prove it (how could they actually prove this?)

 

They have made no attempt to fulfill a legal SAR

 

There are even doubts that Phoenix have a right to trade in the UK

 

Nothing has changed from the very beginning of the thread, the alleged creditor is still nothing more than a metaphorical fat lad standing at the door shouting his mouth off.

 

IW - I am so glad you are getting real support and assistance with this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, just an update of whats gone on today. I recieved returned letters from Luxembourg and it says reason for return parti, dont know what that means, will have to look it up. Next bit of news was a phone call from ARUK asking about letter they sent, I told them all correspondence by letter, she was very persistant so I repeated all correspondence by letter and that I had logged the phone call and I hung up. :D. Dont know where I got the confidence from to do that, maybe its becuse I know I got friends helping me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so I repeated all correspondence by letter and that I had logged the phone call and I hung up. :D. Dont know where I got the confidence from to do that, maybe its becuse I know I got friends helping me.

 

and although you were probably shaking - didn't it feel good :D

 

:lol::lol::lol: Well Done You !! :lol::lol::lol:

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated prior, send the SAR to their London address!

 

AC please please please - Phoenix Recoveries (UK) Limited S.a.r.l Do Not have a London address.

 

It is a Luxembourg based Luxembourg Company - wholly owned 12,500 shares by another Luxembourg Company (CVI CVG (Lux) Master S.a.r.L.). It is managed by Gregor Klaedtke with Patrick Lsurger and Mirko Fischer

 

(and yes it is the 'British Airways' Mirko Fischer)

Edited by gh2008
added BA bit

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...