Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Recommended Topics

  • Posts

    • Hi all,   Lowell sols have responded to my cpr with exactly the same documentation as Lowells sent through. So still no valid agreement!   Defence due Friday by 4pm.   I have updated my defence below based on your points Dx. Many thanks.   Would you and Andy mind having a scan over before i send off on Friday please?   Cheers in advance as always     Particulars of Claim    1.The defendant entered in to a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreement with Vanquis under account reference xxxxxxxx ('the agreement')   2.The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and arrears began to accrue   3.The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 27/09/19 and notice given to the defendant   4. Despite repeated requests for payment the sum of xxx remains due and outstanding.   And the claimant claims a. The said sum of xxxx b. Interest pursuant to s69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue accruing at a daily rate of £0.610 but limited to one year being £222.65 c. Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the  particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with Vanquis. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought to seek clarity from the claimant.   2. Paragraph 3 is noted. I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.   3. On receipt of a notice of acting letter sent from Lowell Solicitors, the Defendant sent for on the 12/11/2020 via royal mail a section 78 request to Lowell Portfolio Ltd pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This for a copy of the agreement. The claimant has partially complied and disclosed various documents however they were unable to comply with disclosing a valid full copy of the executed agreement on which their claim relies upon.   5. The claimant disclosed various screenshots taken from  the originators software of the application and also confirms on their covering letter the relative legislation The Electronic Communications Act 2000 with regards to wet signatures and the requirement of a tick box to validate the application.The screenshots  are devoid of any tick box or any authenticity of IP address conformation check.Therefore the claimant remains in default of my section 78 request and pursuant to section 78  6 a of the CCA1974  the claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.   6. On receipt of this claim form I sent a CPR 31.14 request on the 11/2/21 via royal mail to Lowell Solicitors and again the claimant only disclosed exactly the same documentation. The claimant therefore after a second attempt by the defendant remains in default of said request.   7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice /Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • the mortgage it protects is still active is it not?  
    • Ok thanks, i'll have a read and finger crossed.   I wonder if there is a possible angle with Aviva if not as it transferred to them in 2011 I think it was 😕 
    • you contact the operator of the actual ATM machine with the time and date go look at it and there will be a number on there to ring they will know the money was not dispensed the next time it is refilled it also keeps a log and the camera footage outside and inside the machine. though yes its not quick took me 3mts once to get £100 back out of Link.
    • me again!   Why do most companies insist   on you giving them a phone number!   I am asking on behalf a my  ex father -in-law, he applied for    insurance I believe but because he has no phone of any sort they told him they can not continue his application! Why? is it law to have a phone???? I myself only have a  bog standard mobile, has no camera, no internet etc, I  do not give my number out to anyone yet get SWAMPED with unwanted calls and texts even though I registered it with TPS!   I find it really unfair you are expected to have a phone, not everyone wants one or afford one   Sandy xx  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

MBNA, Intelligent Finance


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5494 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I owe over £2000 to MBNA and also 2 seperate amounts to Intelligent Finance.

 

They have now SOLD the debts.

 

To LINK FINANCIAL and Tessera Portfolio Management respectively.

 

Do I still seek recompense from MBNA and IF or these new companies as they are the LEGAL owners of the liabilities.

 

The charges etc exceed the sums sought, just I tell them to get lost?

 

Any help would be grateful

Just another 21 Banks to go......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the liberty of posting this message on http://www.debthelpuk.co.uk where people have quite a lot of experience of Link. There was a lengthy debate between two of the resident lawyers seemed to conclude that you could recover any charges you have paid from whoever you paid them to and that you have a strong defence against any attempt by the debt buyer to sue you. Bear in mind that Link are well known for both going to court and seeking forthwith judgments and charging orders, so be on your guard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thnx,

 

MBNA Balance is £2093......charges are £2500+

IF Balance is £594.....charges are £1500+

IF Balance is £1642......charges are £1500+

 

LINK have told me they won't go to court...informed them my family would settle at 40% as in no position to make an offer.

 

They won't have it, sent them recorded letter revoking my offer of settlement.

 

Nothing to lose...Bankruptcy beckons if I cannot agree terms...!!!!

 

There is money in the banks, need to make a withdrawal!!!!!!!

Just another 21 Banks to go......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you are technically fecked, unless you can make minimum payments

 

but if you start action now and give say 10 working days for full satisfaction, then at least they are not going to default them(well they shoudn't under 13.6 of BC if they subscribe)

 

14days for acknowledgement so 24 days and you could get judgement by default

 

or 28 if they mess about with defence.

 

If they have already defaulted you, submit a counter claim(they would be fairly stupid not to back down).

 

make sure you get all the charges+interest+interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defaulted long time ago.

 

Shall I write informing them that I shall be claiming against the ORIGINAL owner and if they want to take me to court then I will be counterclaiming against them as they are trying to seek judgement for an unenforceable debt?

 

Regards

Just another 21 Banks to go......

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 13 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Just another 21 Banks to go......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5494 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...