HFO - Morgan Stanley Debt

[coledog]

Can I add this reference to the defence?

[broken arrow]

Can I add this reference to the defence?

 

Thats up to dolomite, but I think I would...

[sillygirl1]

Yes, this is why you shouldn't CPR on a split claim, it is a bit like saying "give me a fiver and I'll pay you the tenner I owe you'....

 

I've had dealings with Bryan Carter and split claims, usually he goes for his fees but looking at TR they seem to be going for partial arrears and interest thereon.....

[geee]

Confussed!

[coledog]

geee - we need to look at your thread again in the light of all this as you have other reasons for defence if I remember correctly. All this should be helpful anyway. If you can 'bump' it so it gets to the top of the list..

[geee]

Bumped and link below too..

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?272578-HFO-Turnbull-Rutherford-Morgan-Stanley/page3

[broken arrow]

can you be a bit more specific about CPR and which rule.

Yes, this is why you shouldn't CPR on a split claim, it is a bit like saying "give me a fiver and I'll pay you the tenner I owe you'....

 

I've had dealings with Bryan Carter and split claims, usually he goes for his fees but looking at TR they seem to be going for partial arrears and interest thereon.....

[bdcarr]

CAGS

 

I sent the recorded request off to TurnBULL two weeks Monday and have heard nothing back.

 

I acknowledged the Court 2 weeks tomorrow and just need to no if I should have my defence in by now?

[DonkeyB]

What was the date on the claim form? Add two days to this, then 28 calendar days – that's the time to get it in.

 

Consider a fax/email/recorded delivery letter to HFO/TR to remind them of their obligations, if there's time. It always looks good to be proactive.

[broken arrow]

Phone the court find out when the defence has to be submitted.

 

Write to TR and inform them if they do not comply with you request for docs within 7 days, you will be applying to the courts for an order and costs.

[coledog]

Another 'embarrassed defence' then?

[bdcarr]

issue date was the 3rd Sept.

 

I received on the 9th Sept and acknowledged the 11th Sept and letter went to TurnBULL recorded on the 13th Sept.

 

Since then, I had a call fromHFO asking what my defence was but nothing else.

[broken arrow]

Please get a defence in soon then.

[SP500]

good luck bdcarr, seems to be a few of us defending very similar part claims and deadlines in these HFO /TR cases

[coledog]

Particulars of Claim:

The claim in for monies due under an interest bearing credit agreement, regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which the defendant entered into with on .

The claimant purchased the account on 14 September 2006. Not of assignment has been provided to the defendant under the agreement. In order to avoid any further action, the defendant should contact the claimants solicitor xxxxxxx. Failure to respond will result in a CCJ.

On satisifaction of the claim and the costs there will be an unpaind balance to be paid by the defendant, this is currently accuring interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

 

 

Added the POC above for info.

 

Please ring the court and check the dates for submitting defence.

 

As I understand it they previously sent an application form but no T & C. No Notice of Assignment sent.

 

Did you receive anything back from Barclaycard? If not - give them a ring and chase up the SAR, ask who the account was sold to and when.

 

To support the POC they need a credit agreement showing their right to now charge interest and a NOA but no response to your CPA request. The defence will need to point this out.

[coledog]

Possible very draft defence we can work with - not mentioned split claim but all ideas welcome:

 

I, xxxx, am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by xxxxx

 

2 Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: -

 

4. The claimants Particulars of Claim are vague and fail to disclose any cause of action, they appear to be an abuse of the process in that they fail to deal with the basic rules of pleading in accordance with the CPR even allowing for the constraints of the bulk issue system.

 

5. No documents supporting the claims in the particulars have been offered and despite a request to the claimant for further information via CPR 31.14 dated xx/xx/xxxx sent by recorded delivery none has been forthcoming and as a result the defendant cannot plead in defence to the claim

 

6. In this regard I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters;

 

a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the method by which the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim.

 

b) A copy of the purported written contract that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form.

 

c) A copy of any evidence of both the scope and nature of any default, and proof of any amount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has not been served

 

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the date of mailing of any Notice of Assignment they claim was sent & that its content was valid.

 

8. The claimant seeks to claim interestof £xxx and also interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts acts 1984. The defendant notes that the claimant is not entitled to do so and attention is drawn to The County Courts (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991 (No. 1184 (L. 12)) Section 2 (3)(a) which sets out that this is the case where a claim is in relation to a debt regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

9. Notwithstanding the fact that no valid credit agreement which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and subsequent Regulations made under the Act has been produced, it is averred that no valid Notice of Assignment has been served upon the Defendant and therefore the Claimant is precluded from taking this action.

 

10 Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears without merit, the defendant respectfully asks the court to be allowed to submit a fully particularised defence should the claimant provide copies of the original documents they will rely upon.

 

11. The defendant wishes to allow the claimant additional time to produce the documents mentioned above and would respectfully ask the court to allow a further 14 days for this. Should the documents not be produced then the defendant asks the court to exercise its powers to strike out the claimants claim.

[patrickq1]

HFO CAPITAL LIMITED

 

 

 

 

 

Key Company Details for HFO CAPITAL LIMITED

 

Registered Number:446327 Company Type:SINGLE MEMBER PRIVATE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES Company Status:NORMAL Principal NACE Code: [74.84] OTHER BUSINESS ACTIVITIES N.E.C.

Incorporated:18/09/2007

Registered Address:Riverside Two

Sir John Rogerson's Quay

Dublin 2

Previous Names:SALAKA LIMITED

[bdcarr]

Thanks, been away with work and just back. Claim wont let me do it online so its going recorded delivery in the morning.

 

Thanks Cole.

 

No news from either the SAR request or from Turnbull

[bdcarr]

Cole, you are right no T&C's or Notice of Assignment.

 

The only thing I would add is that the purchase date is 14th Sept 2006 and HFO Capital incorporated in Sept 2007.

[broken arrow]

Cole, you are right no T&C's or Notice of Assignment.

 

The only thing I would add is that the purchase date is 14th Sept 2006 and HFO Capital incorporated in Sept 2007.

 

They will be saying it was bought Capital Cayman then assigned to Dublin, Jan 2008.

Edited September 29, 2010 by broken arrow

[DonkeyB]

... but you weren’t told about any assignment to Dublin, were you? Oooops... LoP 1925 has its uses!

[bdcarr]

Thanks Donkey, the dates of assignment and incorporation are perfect. Letter gone in the post to the courts today.

[broken arrow]

... but you weren’t told about any assignment to Dublin, were you? Oooops... LoP 1925 has its uses!

 

Was anyone? strange how in September 2008, they only mentioned HFO Cayman in their WS.

[DonkeyB]

Exactly. They reckon that because both owners had the same name, NoAs weren’t required. How wrong they are...

[bdcarr]

Ive just checked Law Society for Turnbull and its a 1 partner firm with Areas of Law being Business Affairs, Computer & IT Law and Corporate Finance. He certainly has a lot to answer for does the partner and director. Also he is limited to avoid any law suits.

 

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/choosingandusing/findasolicitor/view=lawfirmdetails.law?orgid=441908&searchType=L#regprincipals