Jump to content


MBNA/Hillsden Securities


WillR
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4380 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

The postman has been busy this morning, bringing me cheerful news for the Bank Holiday weekend :mad:

 

Some background - I've got into severe debt problems with Lloyds, Barclaycard & MBNA following an extended period of unemployment (8 months and counting)

 

I've an ongoing complaint with Lloyds who have provided me with a copy of a scanned CCA. I've received another letter from them today and am in the process of referring the whole lot to the Financial Services Ombudsman (for all the good it is likely to do me). Thread here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/197971-lloyds-bls-redundancy.html

 

Barclaycard have Mercers onto me. I've CCA'd them last week, but looking through the various Barclays threads on here, it appears this will be a long process. I've received a threat letter from Mercers today stating that they will pass my account to ''A local debt collector who may call at my home to obtain full repayment'' :(

 

But the reason for this new thread is I have received the following response from Hillsden Securities following my CCA request to them (relating to an MBNA account). They are already well outside of the 12+2 days period

 

Anyway, the letter from Hillsden states several things as follows:-

 

We are still awaiting a copy of your agreement and statement of account from the original lender. When these become available they will be forwarded to you.
- Fair Enough

 

If we are unable to forward a copy of the original agreement, we will be able to supply a true copy of the document which will comply with section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974
- :???:

 

We would like to draw your attention to the ruling in the case of McGuffick v RBS judgement dated 6th October 2009 in relation to 'what is considered enforcement'; the judgement stated that the bringing of proceedings is not enforcement. It follows that demanding payment is a step taken prior ro the commencement of proceedings and therefore not considered enforcement. We will continue to report the account status to the credit reference agencies as this is also not considered as enforcement.
?? Very confused here. Are they making an assumption based on the case they quoted that they can do whatever they like since the 'bringing of proceedings is not considered enforcement!' How is it possible that the bringing of proceedings can be considered anything other than enforcement?

 

Whilst we may not be able to enforce the agreement until the documentation is provided, the monies remain outstanding and the underlying obligation to repay remains intact. In view of the above judgement the account will remain with our collections department for collections activity to continue.
So, despite the fact that they have defaulted on my CCA request so far, they feel that they have the legal right to continue collections activities. Is this correct, since it seems contrary to plenty of what I've read on here?

 

Any advice, comments, welcomed!

 

Finally, worst case scenario supposing they all provide me with the relevant documentation and everything is above board. I have NO money with which to pay these people. What can I do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That letter is a standard template from them and is rubbish. They cannot pursue the debt without an agreement never mind attempt enforcement. Ignore it. Tony Locke isn't very clever and shouldn't try to baffle people when he hasn't a clue what he is talking about. I would send a copy to the OFT and tell them that Hillesden is try to obtain payment on alleged debts by misquoting case law. Every report is another nail in their coffin and Hillsden has quite a few reports against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, the letter from Hillsden states several things as follows:-

 

Quote:

We are still awaiting a copy of your agreement and statement of account from the original lender. When these become available they will be forwarded to you.

- Fair Enough

Until such time all activity should be suspended and no payments need be made as the account is dispute.

 

Quote:

If we are unable to forward a copy of the original agreement, we will be able to supply a true copy of the document which will comply with section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

- :confused:

Fine, but that is of no use - and the above response still applies.

 

Quote:

We would like to draw your attention to the ruling in the case of McGuffick v RBSlink3.gif judgement dated 6th October 2009 in relation to 'what is considered enforcement'; the judgement stated that the bringing of proceedings is not enforcement. It follows that demanding payment is a step taken prior ro the commencement of proceedings and therefore not considered enforcement. We will continue to report the account status to the credit reference agencieslink3.gif as this is also not considered as enforcement.

?? Very confused here. Are they making an assumption based on the case they quoted that they can do whatever they like since the 'bringing of proceedings is not considered enforcement!' How is it possible that the bringing of proceedings can be considered anything other than enforcement?

 

This actually means they can supply a 'made up' version, but this is still not enforceable in a Cour of Law, so account still in dispute.

 

Quote:

Whilst we may not be able to enforce the agreement until the documentation is provided, the monies remain outstanding and the underlying obligation to repay remains intact. In view of the above judgement the account will remain with our collections department for collections activity to continue.

So, despite the fact that they have defaulted on my CCA request so far, they feel that they have the legal right to continue collections activities. Is this correct, since it seems contrary to plenty of what I've read on here?

 

Why are they using the word Judgement, there is no CCJ on this account is there, or is this just a misleading use of the word to try and distress you> if so it must be reported as already suggested.

 

Any advice, comments, welcomed!

 

Finally, worst case scenario supposing they all provide me with the relevant documentation and everything is above board. I have NO money with which to pay these people. What can I do?

 

Offer £1 per month and continue to pay this regularly, they will not like it but a judge in a court would not be best pleased if they then took you to Court.

user_online.gifreputation.gif report.gif

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the advice Pinky69 & harrassed senior. No, there is no CCJ on any of my debts at the moment. The Judgement they refer to relates to the one stated in the letter

 

We would like to draw your attention to the ruling in the case of McGuffick v RBS judgement dated 6th October 2009 in relation to 'what is considered enforcement'; the judgement stated that the bringing of proceedings is not enforcement

 

As you both have said, it is very misleading and definitely some attempt at scare tactics.

 

I'll report it to the OFT.

 

Should I offer them £1 p/m now, or only after they have provided me with the relevant documentation should it prove to be in order?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Entirely up to you unless your last payment/acknowledgement was more or nearly more that 6 years ago (5 in Scotland). If it were me, I would wait.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep until they can show that they have the correct documents, ie, the CCA then there is no legal requirement for you to pay them a penny.

 

Even when/if they do send you an agreement, scan and post it up on here, removing all ID, and I am confident there will be enough holes in it for it to be unenforceable.

 

As already said, they cannot take any action against you without the 'original' agreement that they would need to put before a Judge, so Tony Locke incorrectly saying that they can, by sending you an agreement that you 'would have' been issued with at the time you took out the agreement, won't wash, it needs to be the original.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Direct Legal & Collections (Hilesden Securities) claim they have purchased the debt from original lender, they have written to me once last August saying I needed to contact them about an alleged outstanding balance. I have never contacted them or in any way entered into any contract with them, I have never confirmed who I was or acknowledged any debt. I recently received a letter from a solicitor saying I needed to contact Direct Legal & Collections within 7 days or they MAY (not will) start collection proceedings. My letter as follows:

 

Dear Sirs,

Notice and Demand

DO NOT IGNORE THIS NOTICE

Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.

Regarding Reference: ************, your correspondence dated 26th May, 2010.

Thank you for your letter of 26th May, 2010. Notice is hereby given that your claims are insufficient and are hereby refused for cause, without dishonour, due to the fact that you have presented no evidence of your capacity as either:

1. a bona fide party to any contract in which I am also a party; or

2. an agent of a bona fide party to any contract in which I am also a party; or

3. a holder in due course of any debt to which I am obligated.

4. evidence of the validity of the original alleged contract.

Stories of companies falsely claiming money to which they are not entitled are rife. Absent any evidence of capacity, I have no obligation to either confirm or deny any contractual relationship with the alleged creditor mentioned in your correspondence, or yourselves. Accordingly, you are hereby given notice that you are in a condition of estoppellink3.gif with regard to your claims. Upon receipt of reasonable evidence of sufficient capacity I will give this matter timely attention. I will deem the following to be sufficient evidence:

A complete copy of any and all contracts which affect or affected your relationship with the alleged principal, as they apply to the above-referenced matter. Said contracts must be certified "true, correct, and complete" by affidavit signed under penalty of perjury, by a principal officer of your company in a position to know all the details of your company's relationship with the alleged principal, in his or her personal capacity. The affidavit must also either completely describe any additional verbal, constructive, or implied contracts you have with the alleged principal affecting this matter, or else certify that no such additional contracts exist or existed.

I hereby give you thirty (30) days to reply to this notice from the date you receive this communication with a notice sent using recorded post and signed under full commercial liability and penalty of perjury, assuring and promising me that all of the replies and details given to the above requests are true, correct and complete and without deception, fraud or mischief. Your failure to provide all of the aforementioned documentation in the manner described within thirty (30) days from the date you receive this communication constitutes your agreement to the following terms:

1. that you are or were a third party interloper;

2. that you have or had no legal standing;

3. that you have or had no first-hand knowledge of this matter;

4. that your claim is or was fraudulent;

5. that you will pursue this matter no further.

Further, you agree:

6. that you accept liability for any damages I suffer or suffered as a result of your actions;

7. that any negative remarks made to a credit reference agency will be removed and confirmation of said removal sent to me within thirty days of this communication;

Please note that I am asking for information that will prove the validity of any contract between us. Such validity must be established before any legislation concerning its content can be relevant. You are hereby notified that this is not a request under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act or any other legislation.

Please be advised that I am keeping a written record of all correspondence in this regard and therefore do not consent to discuss this matter over the telephone. Any future communications must be written, otherwise you are hereby given notice that they will be ignored without dishonour on my part. Any telephone callslink3.gif regarding this matter, whether by an actual person, or a computerised system, or personal visits; will be deemed harassment and dealt with accordingly.

If you wish to provide evidence of your capacity as either Agent, or Holder in Due Course, Notice is hereby given that in addition to the above, as Agent you would be subject to the same terms and conditionslink3.gif as the original alleged contract. As Holder in Due Course you would be subject to the same duties and obligations as the original party. In either case I will require evidence of the validity of the original contract, as I have a reasonable expectation that you would do if you did not want to run the risk of acting illegally. If you did not satisfy yourselves as to the validity of the original contract when becoming either Agent or Holder in Due Course, it would show a profound failure in your due diligence and duty of care. If you did so satisfy yourselves, the required information should be readily to hand.

Inexperienced and vulnerable people are easily intimidated into making payments by what would appear to be unsubstantiated threats. At this moment I am not in possession of any evidence that supports such threats. That is precisely what I am requesting. If, in the event, no such evidence is forthcoming, the offering of these threats passes from mere negligence into the realms of criminal activity.

Any previous acknowledgement by me of any alleged debt is hereby withdrawn as having been obtained under duress.

Please notice that the commonly accepted principles of good faith demand that if you have any reasonable objections to this Notice and Demand, that you immediately state any and all such objections and not harbour any hidden objections with which to surprise me later. Therefore it is my reasonable expectation that should you not offer any specific objections to any part of this Notice and Demand, sent to me by recorded delivery within thirty (30) days from your receipt of same, that I may presume your agreement to the above terms.

I will presume silence to mean acquiescence in all these matters.

Yours sincerely without ill-will, vexation or frivolity,

 

 

 

******: of the ***** Family

Without any admission of any liability whatsoever, and with all Natural, Inalienable Human Rights reserved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Entirely up to you unless your last payment/acknowledgement was more or nearly more that 6 years ago (5 in Scotland). If it were me, I would wait.

 

DO NOT enter into any agreement with Hillesden Securities, they have NO authority in your affairs, you do not have a contract with them, they are 3rd party interlopers. ALL debt collectors and bailifs are 3rd party interlopers. This simply means that you did not contract with them to get involved - did you? They know this which is why they use intimidation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...