Halifax Taking Me To Court

[The Mould]

It's very easy to be lulled into a false sense of security too IMO and I think this may be the case here. It is not a good idea to rely on one person, if as stated, incorrect information is being given.

 

My post 167 indicated who I would be asking for help from!

 

Can any of you be honest and just say it straight, what is it that I have done wrong?

 

Just say it, If I have made a major mistake, correct it for wish me well's sake, what is it, I have been genuinely trying to help, I really do not like the way some of you are commenting about my help, can you just be honest and say why my imput is so useless or no good?

 

The Mould

[wish me well]

Please feel free anyone who wishes to see that I do not critise anyone and always express my deepest thanks to any advice, just take a look at the posts by myself. vjohn82 I havent ever meant to come across as critising you, I express my sincere apologise if that is the way you have interpreted my responses to you advice but if you look back I am sure you will find I really havent. I have no reason to either insult or otherwise anyone on this forum, all I asked for is advice, you can clearly see that I am lost and do not know the in's and out's of the law. I think its is cruel the way you have just responded but there is nothing I can do to make anyone help me so kindest wishes

 

wish me well

Edited April 8, 2010 by wish me well

[vjohn82]

If you need help... you ask.

 

I was asked to come along on behalf of you... I don't recall you asking for my help once.

 

TheMould... I really have nothing to say to you. Your attitude on the other thread towards a couple of other CAGGERS with over 8000 posts to their names was nothing short of ridiculous.

 

You seem like someone on a crusade... fine for people who are not being taken to court... but perhaps you could explain to the OP why estoppel will help them in this case and why they should put without prejudice on the letter so that I know where you are coming from.

 

For anyone on the outside it appears that you are trying to:

 

a) scupper their case by bringing in technicalities that will be chewed up by a less than talented Judge

 

b) scupper their case by preventing any form of communication being disclosed to the court to prove the creditors lack of case and lack of the OP's negotiation

 

I'm not saying YOU ARE INTENDING to do those things only it APPEARS SO from someone looking in.

[The Mould]

I've pointed out two fatal errors... estoppel and without prejudice.

 

Not needed... the OP cannot possibly be expected to argue the point in court.

 

 

OK, THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE BIT IS DONE WITH.

 

As far as estoppel is concerend, wish me well can argue this successfully IMO, and estoppel does apply to wish me well's case.

 

What else is wrong with my imput, Halifax will not want to take this to court when they learn of wish me well's defence.

 

Wish me well are you there?

 

Can you say anything to me?

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[AndyOrch]

Intriguing thread subscribing;)

 

Regards

 

Andy

[The Mould]

And another thing, you all see it this way because that's how you want to see it, I am not trying to mess things up, what the hell is wrong with you?

 

ESTOPPEL, is no technicality to wish me well's case, Halifax broke an agreement, and then covered it up.

 

As far as details are concerend, Halifax, Sainsbury's and Blairs etc are all under the same umbrella, when I SAR'D SAINSBURY'S some of the paper work was from Halifax, that's how I know about account screens and their procedures for puting an account into collections and the flipping agent communication system the P plus system!

 

What on earth do you think I do?, I don't bloody work there!

 

The Mould

[wish me well]

If you need help... you ask.

 

I was asked to come along on behalf of you... I don't recall you asking for my help once.

 

TheMould... I really have nothing to say to you. Your attitude on the other thread towards a couple of other CAGGERS with over 8000 posts to their names was nothing short of ridiculous.

 

You seem like someone on a crusade... fine for people who are not being taken to court... but perhaps you could explain to the OP why estoppel will help them in this case and why they should put without prejudice on the letter so that I know where you are coming from.

 

For anyone on the outside it appears that you are trying to:

 

a) scupper their case by bringing in technicalities that will be chewed up by a less than talented Judge

 

b) scupper their case by preventing any form of communication being disclosed to the court to prove the creditors lack of case and lack of the OP's negotiation

 

I'm not saying YOU ARE INTENDING to do those things only it APPEARS SO from someone looking in.

 

Dear vjohn 82

 

in my very first post I asked anyone for help, this included you of course. Anyone who can help me is greatly appreciated and if you can and are willing then I send my upmost thanks, if not as I said early, thats upto you and I cannot force anyone to help.

 

kindest wishes

wish me well

 

p.s. I am a nice person and dont derserve for my thread to turn into a battle ground. Give to others what you would expect for yourself x

[lilly white]

just looking in

 

ok

 

lilly white

[wish me well]

just looking in

 

ok

 

lilly white

 

Thats ok, hope you dont get as lost as I am right now! Oh I have been told to "ask for advice" please if you have any let me know. Thank you

 

take care and kindest wishes

 

wish me well

Edited March 30, 2010 by wish me well
forgot to ask

[vjohn82]

p.s. I am a nice person and dont derserve for my thread to turn into a battle ground. Give to others what you would expect for yourself x

 

Really... so why turn mine into one then? I never mentioned anyone by name etc. I gave you advice on your letter and it was acknowledged by the co-author that it was wrong. I was right and that's all that needs saying IMO.

 

All the best with your case.

 

vjohn82

[Hardupnotfedup]

. I think its is cruel the way you have just responded but there is nothing I can do to make anyone help me so kindest wishes

 

Wish me well , I am feeling for you, you have been put in a horrible position but I honestly feel that everyone involved in this thread has your interests at heart.

VJohn has had input into this because he cares, he is a vastly experienced advisor on here and the amount of green blobs in relation to the number of posts tells everyone that. You need to use your own judgement in to what advice you will heed. I know which way I would go with this.

Mould keep up the work but nobody is sniping you or having a go why would they?

The best people make errors learn to accept counter advice gracefully.

[The Mould]

Thats ok, hope you dont get as lost as I am right now! Oh I have been told to "ask for advice" please if you have any let me know. Thank you

 

take care and kindest wishes

 

wish me well

 

Wish me well,

 

I have not told any lies to you, I understand your position, majority rule, and now you think I have been messing around.

 

I have absolutely tried my best to help you, Vjohn has pointed out without prejudice, my mistake, so many late nights.

 

Estoppel, this applies to your case, there are no technicalities about that.

 

I really do understand if you no longer want to receive a reply from me, I have been 100% honest with you, as long as you always can accept that I will be very happy and I hope that someone else will help you.

 

I am so very sorry if you feel that I have not done the right thing by you or for you.

 

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[lilly white]

Thats ok, hope you dont get as lost as I am right now! Oh I have been told to "ask for advice" please if you have any let me know. Thank you

 

take care and kindest wishes

 

wish me well

 

May i ask where are you now.

 

Do you have a court date.or do you have an agreedment with BOS

[wish me well]

Really... so why turn mine into one then? I never mentioned anyone by name etc. I gave you advice on your letter and it was acknowledged by the co-author that it was wrong. I was right and that's all that needs saying IMO.

 

All the best with your case.

 

vjohn82

 

 

One of your thread was set on foundations of a battle ground between Yourself and The Mould! This is not my argument.

 

Ok thank you

 

If you do not wish to help me, please leave my thread thats all I can say.

 

kindest wishes sincerely meant.

 

wish me well

Edited March 31, 2010 by wish me well

[lilly white]

Well i have dealt with halifax and bos and to be honest i found them to be a walk in the park,

NOW IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT 1st credit AND CAPQ..... LOOK ME UP.

[wish me well]

Well i have dealt with halifax and bos and to be honest i found them to be a walk in the park,

NOW IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT 1st credit AND CAPQ..... LOOK ME UP.

 

Ok thank you and I sure will if and when the time comes with those. Kindest wishes

 

wish me well

[lilly white]

wish me well.

 

i have now reread your tread and i see that you going on line to defend all the claim.

ok we need to put in a defence.

 

May i ask do we have a copy of the CCA also i see also that we do have a copy of the default notice.and there an issue with the default notice is this correct.

[wish me well]

wish me well.

 

i have now reread your tread and i see that you going on line to defend all the claim.

ok we need to put in a defence.

 

May i ask do we have a copy of the CCA also i see also that we do have a copy of the default notice.and there an issue with the default notice is this correct.

 

I have a copy of the CCA and it all looks in order but the default notice is way out, I have posted the default notice ,give me a sec and I will check what post it is.

 

Kindest wishes and thanks

 

wish me well:-)

[wish me well]

23rd July 2008

 

 

Dear Me

 

IMPORTANT - YOU SHOULD READ THIS CAREFULLY

 

This a default notice served under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Clause 2.2 of your terms and conditions contains details of the minimum payment you must make each month. You are in breach of that clause as arrears of £6xx.xx are outstanding.

 

You must pay £6xx.xx into your credit card account number 4xxxxxxxxx before 24th July 2008.

 

IF THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE IS TAKEN BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN NO FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN RESPECT OF THE BREACH.

 

IF YOU DO NOT TAKE THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN THEN THE FURTHER ACTION SET OUT BELOW MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST YOU.

 

We will terminate our agreement with you and close your credit card account 4xxxxxxxx. You must pay the full balance owing on your account immediately. If you do not do this, we may take legal proceedings against you and/or instruct a debt collection agency to recover any amount you owe us on your account.

 

If your account conditions allow, we may also transfer money from any other accounts you may have with us to reduce the debt outstanding.

 

You and any authorised users must stop using your card immediately. Your cards must be cut in two pieces through the magnetic strip on the back of the card and returned to us at the address overleaf before the 24th July 2008. If your card have already been returned please ignore this request.

 

If you have not paid the amount requested above within 28 days of the date of this letter or made satisfactory proposals to do so, we will pass details of the default to a licensed credit reference agency and this will be recorded on your credit file.

 

It then informs me if I am having difficulty paying etc etc.

I hope this helps x

 

Ta da

 

Hope this is what you need to look at lily

 

Once again thankyou

Edited April 8, 2010 by wish me well

[lilly white]

I have a copy of the CCA and it all looks in order but the default notice is way out, I have posted the default notice ,give me a sec and I will check what post it is.

 

Kindest wishes and thanks

 

wish me well:-)

 

The cca when did you take it out, what date was it before 2007.

 

the rates in the agreedment are they the same as you where charged please check this. as per your statments do you have all your statments.

[lilly white]

so the default notice dated 23 july 2008 payment require by the 24 july 2008

 

well well poor halifax .

 

ok

 

i need to see the POC WHAT DID IT SAY.

 

Also i would like you to read this.and understand what is being said or not.

 

we will edit as we go a long.

 

1. It is denied that the matters pleaded in the Particulars of Claim actually disclose any cause of action. In particular:-

 

 

a) It is denied that that the Defendant can have liability to "pay" the Claimant sums of money simply on account of "requests for payment" in relation to a halifax credit card- the only matters pleaded.

 

 

No cause of action known to English Law exists on the basis of such "requests for payment"

 

 

 

b) Neither the Claimant being HALIFAX which it appears (on the face of the Particulars, although due to their vagueness it is hard to know) to be being alleged were due

 

 

c) In any event, it is denied that the Defendant has or ever has had liability to pay - whomever that may be - any sum whatsoever.

 

2. It is expressly denied the Defendant is liable to pay any money pursuant to contract or otherwise to the Claimant.

 

3. Without prejudice to the above contentions, the Defendant asserts that in particular, given that the original of the liability is said to be a credit card given by "HALIFAX(which is a person / entity / company not known to the Defendant), it will be the case, taking into account the amount of the liability, that the transaction and the underlying agreement (if any) between HALIFAX credit card and the Claimant would be regulated by the terms of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

4. It is the express contention of the Defendant - again without prejudice to the contention that there is in fact no agreement - that any such agreement as exists does not comply with the Act. It is impossible to plead further in the absence of a pleading by the Claimant as to what the agreement was and what its terms were and the Defendant reserves the right further to plead Particulars of failure to comply in the event that the Claimant amends it Particulars of Claim to allege the agreement

[lilly white]

DEFAULT NOTICE

 

The Need for a Default notice

Notwithstanding the above, it is also drawn to the courts attention that no default notice required by s87 (1) Consumer Credit act 1974 has been attached to the CLAIM

It is denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant

Notwithstanding the above points, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87,88 and 89 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement. therefore without a valid default notice, I suggest the claimants case falls flat and cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

[wish me well]

I have just read that most of the time you need the POC info so here it is word for word:

The Claimants claim is for £xxxxx presently due pursuant to a credit agreement entered into by the parties, full particulars of which have been supplied hitherto. By an agreement dated 17/3/2006 the defendant has an account number 4xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the claimant. The defendant has failed or delayed to adhere to the terms of the Default Notice issued by the claimant under the terms of the consumer credit act 1974. The balance due as at 18/3/2010 on said account is £xxxxxxx. I hope this helps in getting some replies. Once again thanks everyone.

 

Here are the POC which I posted first off, right I have today acknowledge the court and advised that I am to defend. Have I done the right thing?

 

Thank you lilywhite

 

kindest wishes

wish me well

[wish me well]

Wish me well,

 

I have not told any lies to you, I understand your position, majority rule, and now you think I have been messing around.

 

I have absolutely tried my best to help you, Vjohn has pointed out without prejudice, my mistake, so many late nights.

 

Estoppel, this applies to your case, there are no technicalities about that.

 

I really do understand if you no longer want to receive a reply from me, I have been 100% honest with you, as long as you always can accept that I will be very happy and I hope that someone else will help you.

 

I am so very sorry if you feel that I have not done the right thing by you or for you.

 

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

 

Dear The Mould

 

I have and always will appreciate all of the help you have given me and I hope continue to give.

I was refering to being lost because there was fight going on and the issues I have were being side tracked.

 

Anyway I hope you will continue to help and I really do think that the majority of what you have supplied has been invaluable to me and my case. One exception being "without Prejudice" which you have taken on board and accepted as the good natured and kind person you seem to be

 

Kindest wishes

 

wish me well x

Edited March 31, 2010 by wish me well

[lilly white]

Here are the POC which I posted first off, right I have today acknowledge the court and advised that I am to defend. Have I done the right thing?

 

Thank you lilywhite

 

kindest wishes

wish me well

 

 

OK THE DEFAULT NOTICE IS A KILLER.

 

OK. The POC are indeed vague, but that is because of the Northampton procedure..

 

. The claimant must prove its claim. You have to prove nothing!

 

The procedure (generally) for litigation is as follows:-

 

1. Claim served (inc POC)

2. AOS filed

3. File/serve defence

4. Allocation questionnaires filed

5. Directions given

6. Disclosure/Inspection

7. Exchange statements

8. Listing

9. Trial

 

You should wait until disclosure and see what it brings before sending letters for specific documents. The claimant will give you a list of the documents they intend to use to prove its claim. This will include, logically, the agreement, statements, default notice, correspondence common to the parties etc. You, at that stage can ask for inspection (copies of their docs). Theoretically, they cannot use any documents at trial not disclosed.

 

You will also have to provide a list of documents upon which you intend to rely (not precedents, but actual docs - you probably won't have any other than a few letters) and provide inpection of any docs they want from you.

 

So you see, the letters referred to above are only asking for that which you will be entitled to and some you are not. The letters request docs which relate to matters not central to the issues between the parties and are not proportionate to that in issue. The letters are a 'fishing expedition' and that will not be allowed by the court. Indeed they probably breach the rules (CPR) and be considered an attempt to cloud the 'true' issues.

 

If the claimant does not disclose sufficient docs to prove its claim, they probably don't have them. You should at that stage write a short letter requesting the same and in default invite them to discontinue the action. You can make an application (N.244) to the court compelling the claimant to comply with disclosure and in default the claim be struck out