Discontinued claim... but now enforcing judgement??? robbersway/HSBC

[vjohn82]

Hi all,

 

My better half received this letter this morning...

 

 

Now she received this (directly relating to the claim) in Dec 2009

 

 

And previously this following a s.78 request...

 

 

Any advice on these would be helpful...

 

My opinion is that the discontinuance of the original judgement means no substitution can take place. Can they litigate on this despite a previous party failing to do it properly?

 

My thoughts are to respond by stating quite clearly that the judgement was discontinued by the previous claimant due to issues with the credit agreement, default notice etc and that as that claim was issued it terminated the account and therefore no further liability exists.

[sillygirl1]

Its an abuse of process, if a claim goes through just quote the old claim and provide the courts with a copy of the paperwork.

 

Odds on the original creditor hasn't passed this information onto the new chasing agent so you should do it - just to cover your back.

 

I had the same with Robinson Way chasing a discontinued alleged debt, cost them more to chase me than the price of the alleged debt!

[vjohn82]

I might also add no defence was filed for the original claim

[dx100uk]

oh thats nice

 

i'd wind them up a bit first before you post them the set aside comfirmation.

 

fire them off a letter stating you have no intention of paying the debt.

 

then wait for them to squel. then say soory i cave in

here is your money

and fill an env with monopoly money stapled to your letter.

 

 

please!

 

dx

[dx100uk]

hello guests.........

 

 

dx

[vjohn82]

oh thats nice

 

i'd wind them up a bit first before you post them the set aside comfirmation.

 

fire them off a letter stating you have no intention of paying the debt.

 

then wait for them to squel. then say soory i cave in

here is your money

and fill an env with monopoly money stapled to your letter.

 

 

please!

 

dx

 

Is that your official and learned advice Sir? :D:D

 

I'd rather them just go to a dark room with a loaded weapon and shoot whatever appendage offends them the most and then return to their desk. That's more likely than them ever getting a penny of this anyway.

 

I suspect the debt is statute barred by now... however, if proceedings were issued in 2006 and they discontinued (because it was filed in error) does this mean the statute barred clock was reset to 2006?

[pt2537]

LMFAO

 

ok, so they are going to enforce a judgment that was set aside by order of the court.

 

Id like to see how they intend to do that

 

One point, on the set aside, how did that occur, did you apply on notice? or did the court really do it on its own motion?

[ScarletPimpernel]

Dear Sirs

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxx.

 

Given that the judgement to which you refer was set aside on xxxxx, and that Robinson Way wrote, on xxxxx admitting that the alleged debt was unenforceable in court, it appears to me that you cannot take the action you mention. Since I do not think a firm of solicitors could be so incompetent, I can only conclude that you are deliberately attempting to mislead me.

 

Threatening action which cannot be legally taken is contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008; communicating in a misleading manner is a clear breach of the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection.

 

Unless I have, within seven days, your full apology for troubling me with this crass attempt at deception, and an undertaking from your client that no further contact will be made in this matter, I will make formal complaints to the relevant regulatory bodies.

 

If you do not understand this letter you should seek advice from a professional law firm.

 

Yours etc.

[vjohn82]

LMFAO

 

ok, so they are going to enforce a judgment that was set aside by order of the court.

 

Id like to see how they intend to do that

 

One point, on the set aside, how did that occur, did you apply on notice? or did the court really do it on its own motion?

 

In Dec I found a CCJ on one of my wife's credit files (it only appeared on one). I chased it up back to the source and found that Bryan Carter had took the action on behalf of Forward Trust.

 

I complained like hellfire because I could prove, via an assignment document, that the company did not have any cause of action.

 

I was on the phone to Bryan Carter... threatened certain things and they agreed to file a Notice of Discontinuance and for the Judgment to be set aside as it was entered in error.

 

That was the last I heard of it...

 

The actual CCJ though was for £607 and not the value that they claim in the letter (£10k+).

 

Can they take action on this again. Obviously they can't on the set aside CCJ... but can they take legal action now?

 

I also believe the account is statute barred anyway... did the Forward Trust CCJ and then subsequent set aside "reset" the clock or can it be proven that the last cause of action was the last payment date? The CCJ was set aside because it was proven that there was no "cause of action" as per the Limitations Act.

 

Any help on this appreciated... my wife is worried and my lack of knowledge on this part isn't helping me

[dx100uk]

ah the old bryan carter split claim game

thats one of his favourirte tricks

 

type in bryan carter in our search and have a read.

 

dx

[vjohn82]

I noticed that they split claims often... weird.

 

Still unsure where we stand on this though because there is no claim in existence any more.

 

Does anyone know whether this is statute barred or not?

[dx100uk]

claim it is

 

its up to them to prove is is not statute barred

NOT for you to prove it IS.

 

dx

[vjohn82]

I see what you mean... but nice to know the position nonetheless

 

I'm fairly certain that it is statute barred but, being my wife's account, only she would know ;-)

[Guest]

vjohn

is this of any help/relevance?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/235502-appeal-cpr-38-7-a.html#post2788322

[vjohn82]

vjohn

is this of any help/relevance?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/235502-appeal-cpr-38-7-a.html#post2788322

 

Thanks Ford... I recall reading that post some time ago. Thanks for reminding me of where it was

[Guest]

vjohn

 

any developments?

[vjohn82]

Hi,

 

Nothing new on this one I'm afraid... I think my most recent letter to them scared them off ;-)

 

If anything changes I'll be sure to post it here.

 

VJ

[broken arrow]

Hi,

 

Nothing new on this one I'm afraid... I think my most recent letter to them scared them off ;-)

 

If anything changes I'll be sure to post it here.

 

VJ

 

Nice to see you back

[vjohn82]

Cheers BA... they couldn't do without me ;-)

[Guest]

Hi,

 

.....I think my most recent letter to them scared them off ;-)

 

If anything changes I'll be sure to post it here.

 

VJ

 

hi

btw, did you happen to find a citation re the 38.7 appeal case above?

[vjohn82]

Hi all,

 

RWAY have been informed on multiple occasions that the debt they are seeking recovery on is statute barred. They won't take the hint.

 

We have received a letter today stating FORMAL DEMAND FOR PAYMENT with some guff about court action being imminent with the likely routes of how they would enforce such a court order.

 

They make others lives a misery, time to pile some on.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states:

 

 

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by

the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that

experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be

unfair as follows:

• it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from

the creditor during the relevant limitation period

• if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt

is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to

attempt to recover the debt

• it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for

example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally

recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal

provisions, and

• continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

 

How are proceedings issued under section 40? In a similar way to normal small claims court proceedings? Has anyone tried this route before? Is there any case law on the books?

 

Any help appreciated. Costs to be donated.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Such a letter would also go against the new guidance on DCA letters, issued by the OFT with input from the credit industry's unsavoury club, the CSA.

 

You may also like to consider the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

[vjohn82]

Can you point me in the direction of that guidance? Thanks.

[postggj]

section 40 of the addmin of justice act no longer applies

 

it all comes under CPUTR now

[vjohn82]

section 40 of the addmin of justice act no longer applies

 

it all comes under CPUTR now

 

I've been away too long ;-)

 

Thanks