Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • why waste money on scammers? all you need in law is to prove something was sent. use a 2nd class stamp and get free proof of posting from any po counter. dx  
    • Tracked is NOT necessary. 1st or 2nd class will suffice. Just make sure you obtain free proof of posting and KEEP IT SOMEWHERE SAFE...
    • I've given it a try, I expect alot of work required so will give my eyes and brain a rest as I'm getting word blind.. and I'll come back later following your initial bashings Thanks IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;   I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. 1. 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. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. 4. The Claimant claims a Notice of Assignment was served on the 22/02/2022. This is denied. 5. The Claimant claims a Default Notice was served on the defendant. This is denied. 6. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 7. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. 8. Point 3 is noted and denied. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 9. Point 5 is noted and disputed. 10. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked *** The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 11. Point 11 is noted and disputed. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. 12. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** (dates are wrong) 13. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 14. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. Conclusion 15. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 16. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 17. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter into settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter into such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment. Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • 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

arrow global llc and i , Further help required. - BATTLE CONTINUES


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4767 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

  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hope it goes OK mate.

I wish I could help but my knowledge is very limited in matters such as this.

I have noticed though that since the forum format changed, there seems to be a lot of threads like yours, unanswered or only partially helped.

Perhaps its there are now so many sub forums that things are getting missed.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

SCEDULE OF COSTS (SUMMARY ASSESSMANT)

 

 

CLAIMANT JOE BLOGGS

 

DEFENDANT JOHHN SSMTH

 

DATE XX/XX/XXXX

 

CLAIMED UNDER RULE 48.6 AT £9.25 PER HOUR

 

WORK DONE AND PREPORATION OF DOCUMENTS

 

DATE OF WORK DESCRIPTION OF WORK LENGTH TAKEN AMOUNT CLAIMED (£)

(MINUTES)

 

24/10/2010 LAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 600 £92.50

 

DRAFTING OF WITNESS

 

STATEMENT 120 £18.50

 

CONSIDERING DEFENDNTS/

CLAIMANTS REPLY/DEFENCE 60 £0.25

 

PREPARING COURT BUNDLE 60 £9.25

DRAFTING STATEMENT

 

OF COSTS 60 £9.25

ATTENDANCE AT COURT 60 £9.25

 

OTHER FEES SPECIAL/RECORDED DELIVER 2 X £1.15 £2.30

 

TOTAL PREPARATION TIME 960 MINUTES AT £9.25 AN HOUR £148.00

 

TOTAL OTHER FEES £2.30

 

GRAND TOTAL CLAIMED £151.18

 

 

this is the one i did for godebt and a statutory demand

 

you just ammend and post it up for me to go over

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi bobbydog

 

No we haven't abandoned you. It's just many of us are also busy on other issues.

 

It looks like they are not going tomorrow from the last letter you mentioned in post #288. That doesn't surprise me. Just go along and tell the judge that they haven't responded to your letters for information and documents (those CPR 31.14 and CPR 18 letters I went on about earlier). I suggest you ask the judge to strike out the claim in full.

 

As to costs, I think this is a small claims track, so you won't get costs I'm afraid - and neither would the other side, which is probably why they aren't attending tomorrow.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, even though its not really allowed, you are a LIP. So its worth a stab in the dark to claim for wasted costs.

Its no different than them making this claim in the hope you wouldnt defend and they get a default judgement.

 

Maybe youd have to start your own claim, but let the judge tell you that

Link to post
Share on other sites

well today has been and gone

three things

 

1, lost, as judge only looked at the cca 1974 listed here he deemed it right and legal and decided to me the loser and pay up

i tried to appeal to the judge against his judgement but he refused

2, i have been given the appeal forms to the higher district judge, as i told you all ealier, i am fighting this all the way

and that as it was a small claims track, where defendant and client ( YES they turned up) try to come to a satisfactory conclusion, failing a conclusion being reached then it was due to be returned to court on 3-12-10, but the judge in question decided to find against me there and then.

3, the client also, after judgement was served, tried to obtain judgement against me and all others in posting on this forum, as it could be to the detrimental affect of said company.

judge threw that out, so BC, and AG I am still here and will be pursuing the appeal with the help of others

 

 

YOU CANNOT GAG THE CAG fight on all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Link to post
Share on other sites

and this time round i am looking for more EXPERTS in cca law

i want as much lawful info as possible if any of you know of anyone on here then let them know, i am sure they would want to sharpen their law with me against THEM

are you looking in BC AND AG

Link to post
Share on other sites

bobbydog, if I could help you I would, we can't make people help.

I'll have a look around and see if there's anyone I could ask.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheeky blighters trying to stop people posting!!

 

I'm afraid that your case has gone the way of so many. In all honesty an appeal would be risky and I would be concerned about costs being added to the original claim if you appealed. Sorry I can't give a more positive response, but I believe it's realistic.

 

I can understand your frustration and wanting to take it further, but would urge you to consider possible implications of doing so.

 

Has the judge given you time to pay?

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is nice to know that others follow this issue for guidance, come on caggers there are many who follow, if we let this go then others will give up also then the following on caggers will start to decline we do not want a slippery slope we need professional help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on site team help us i know they got it wrong in court so we need to re-stratify ourselves and go through it all again to sink these people

post 310 is defeatist attitude

we need postggj and others who hold on to rats tails till they submit so come on

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems strange that in an awful lot of the postings everyone huffs and puffs that the law is wrong and that you must to this and then send that, find this out go to court and do other lots of things, then when it goes wrong in court the second time up comes a post like 310 that is defeatist attitude and others who are guests reading this will be rubbing there hands in glee at that sort of submission, thery will think they can get away with it for all others now, so in there eyes they have won against you/us

are you going t olet the mdo that to the c.a.g.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if I didn't give the answer you wanted bobbydog, but the fact of the matter is that the courts aren't saying what we think they should either. This recent post seems quite typical at the moment.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?269036-JCV-facing-Court-Action-mentioning-Carey&p=3192558&viewfull=1#post3192558

Edited by caro
The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the answers the courts are giving is all going against people who are taking the word of caggers, that all they do on here will help them against the people they want help from, only to find that at the end, after the court case all the answer is

sorry but thats the way courts are going at the moment

then tell the people at the start that the courts will most likely go against them so give up now

that is what you are telling me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link updated and yes it does say what the courts are saying. If you want to ignore that and risk more the choice is yours.

 

I'm not saying don't appeal, but I would be failing you if I didn't urge you to think very carefully before taking things further. Could be worth seeing if you can get a free consultation with a solicitor before making a decision.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so do we all just give up now and just give in to these thieves

 

If one strategy isn't working then you try a different one.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i have asked if there is a semi professional person who wants to try and cut his or her teeth on a case like this, i asked the site team to reccomend someone to me

i am willing to pay t otry and force this issue on prescribed terms, but no one has come forward

this leads me to thinking that no one wants to take it up, or that anyone would know that it and all others would fail, that would make all advice given here worth nothing

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAG is independent and does not make recommendations of this type in order to make sure it's independence isn't compromised.

 

Also of course this is a self help site, although it's always wise to seek professional advice if you can. Many offer an initial free consultation anyway which may be enough to tell you if they think you have grounds for an appeal. Just be very careful before you sign up for anything, and if they offer you no win no fee, check if you could still be liable for the other sides costs if you lose, and if you need to pay any money up front for disbursements etc.

 

There is a wealth of information and advice on CAG and lots of differing views, but reading the threads it has been clear for a long time, and in particular since the Carey case in December, and earlier the McGuffick case, that the courts have been coming down hard against consumers.

 

I wish I could give you better news, but that's just the way it is. If that's defeatist I'm sorry, but it is also realistic so my advice to you is to look at things as they are now and think about the best way to move forward and deal with the situation as it is.

 

I won't post any further on your thread for now as I've given you all the advice that I can. Others will no doubt advise differently so you must decide for yourself how to proceed. Remember it's very easy for people to say you should fight on, but they don't have anything to lose if you do that.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...