Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hearing held today in court. I attended in person and Evri had an advocate attend on their behalf to defend their position that my contract is with Packlink and not with them. I also provided a copy of Evri's terms and conditions which explains that a contract is entered into when a parcel is sent with Evri. The judge pointed this out to the Advocate and agreed there is a contract between me and Evri under the Ts and Cs. The judge explained that while Packlink are responsible for organising the delivery of the item, it is Evri who are responsible for handling the goods and delivering them, and therefor Evri has a responsibility to handle the goods with reasonable care and skill. So am pleased to say the judge found in my favour. Hearing lasted about 75mins. Evri has been ordered to make payment within 21 days. Also nice to meet @jk2054 in person.
    • Good morning,    I just wanted to update you on the situation.    I have visits piling up with my current employment and they need doing before I finish at the end of this month.  I am moving to Wiltshire in 3 weeks for a new job helping care homes with their Dementia patients. I tried to work it out and at a guess I will be doing about 20-25,000 miles a year. So need a vehicle that can cope with that mileage, my old car would have done it easy but 🤷‍♂️ I have taken out a loan and got a friend to find me a reliable car that can cope with the miles and hasn't been written off in the past.   I phoned Adrian flux to see if I could use the last months insurance on a new car I have bought, the girl I spoke to phoned Markerstudy and asked them but they said no, my new car doesn't have any modifications.    I had an email from someone who saw one of my appeals for information, they live near the site of the accident and know a nearby farmer who has a security camera at his entrance that catches the traffic and specifically registration plates as he has been robbed before. They said they would reach out for me and see if he still has the data. Unfortunately it wont catch the scene of the crash.   The Police phoned me and said they were closing the report I made, even if they found footage of the vehicle at the time I said the actual incident would be my word vs theirs.  My first response was I am sure google maps would show that they turned around at that location which would verify my version of events, but upon reflection I do understand, I have seen people doing make up with both hands while driving, eating from a bowl steering with their knees and veering all over the place. I am sure some of these people go off the road and claim that someone forced them off.    Markerstudy phoned me yesterday to say that my car is now at Copart, the £80 tank of Vpower diesel was emptied on entry to the site for safety reasons, which I get but it sucks.  It is awaiting being assessed and shouldn't be too long, which is a relief.  I am really glad things do not seem to be going the way of the other stories and they seem to moving quickly.   However I was informed that my car was a structural write off before I bought it - this destroyed me, I was almost sick.  and this is going to affect any offer of money - after hearing the first statement this didn't affect me.   They need to wait for the assessor to check it over but it is highly likely to be written off and the maximum they can offer is £2300.  I was desperate for a car as I was working for an agency at the time, no work no pay, and did not do a vehicle check because I didn't know about them.  The seller did not tell me that it had been structurally written off, he told me that it had the front wing damaged while parked and was repaired at an approved repairer.  Markerstudy records state that it was sold at auction, no record of repair at an approved repairer.  I bought it bank transfer with hand written receipt.    It gets worse.    It turns out my airbags should of gone off. For some reason they are not working. I think we can figure out why.  If I had hit that car head on and had no airbags.    Some good news.    I can arrange a time with Copart to go and take my stereo equipment and any personal items that are left in the car only. I cant live without music and need quality sound, my speakers and amps are Hertz and JLaudio, (no I am not a boy racer with booming subs, I am an audiophile on a budget) I was really worried I wouldn't get them back so this is a huge relief for me. It is stuff I have built up over years of saving and collecting. Everything to do with the vehicle and mods I have declared need to stay to be assessed.   The accident has gone as a fault on my record, I have to remove 2 years NCB which means I still have some to declare which is good.  So it appears at this point that it may be resolved quickly, not in the way I was hoping, but not as bad as I presumed it was going to be based upon that tow truck drivers attitude and behaviour and the horror stories I read.   I am not going to buy the car back and try to make money with all the parts on it, I don't have the time or energy.   I may need an xray on my back and neck.  The whole situation has left me feeling physically sick, drained and I need it done.   The lesson learnt from this  -  My conscience is 100% clear, my attitude to safety and strong sense of personal responsibility - A rated tyres even if on credit card, brake fluid flush every year, regular checks of pads and discs, bushes etc, made avoiding what I believed to be a certain broadside collision possible.   Get a dashcam (searching now for the best I can afford at the moment)  -  Research your insurance company before you buy  -  Pay for total car check before you go and see a car and take someone with you if you are not confident in your ability to assess a vehicle.      Thank you to everyone here who volunteers their time, energy and information, it is greatly appreciated.  You helped my sister with some advice a while ago but we weren't able to follow through, she is struggling with long term health conditions and I ended up in hospital for a while with myocarditis, when I got out and remembered it was too late.  I am going to make a donation now, it is not a lot, I wish I could give more, I will try to come back when things are on a more even keel.    Take care
    • It seems the solicitor has got your case listed for this “appeal” but not for the Stat Dec(SD). You need to ensure you can perform your SD on the day. If you are able to make your SD in court, the situation you are in now is more straightforward than if you made your SD via a solicitor. You have been convicted of two offences (and two were dropped) via proceedings of which you were not aware. The way to remedy that is to perform an SD. No appeal is necessary (nor is it available via the magistrates’ court). If you are able to make your SD this is how I see it panning out: You will make your SD to the court. The court must allow you to make it as it will have been made within 21 days of you discovering your convictions. You will then be asked to enter pleas to the four charges again. At this point you should plead not guilty to all four but make the court aware that you will plead guilty to the speeding charges on the condition that the FtP charges are dropped. The prosecutor will be asked whether or not this is agreed. In my opinion the overwhelming likelihood is that it will be. If it is you will be sentenced for the two speeding offences under the normal guidelines. In the unlikely event it is not accepted,  the speeding charges will be withdrawn (they have no evidence you were driving). You have no viable defence to the FtP charges and so should plead guilty. This will mean 12 points and a “totting up” ban (as you have already suffered). You can present an “Exceptional Hardship” argument to try to avoid this (explained below).   Because of this, I don’t see any need to make an argument to ask to have any ban suspended (pending an appeal to the Crown Court) unless and until you are banned again. The only reason I can think the solicitor suggested this is to secure a (Magistrates')  court date. I was surprised when you said you had an appointment so quickly; a date for an SD usually takes longer than that. However, if you can use it to your advantage, all well and good. I can’t comment on the argument that the two speeding offences were committed “on the same occasion” as I don’t have the details. That phrase is not defined anywhere and is a matter for the court to decide. It’s an interesting thought (and only that) that such an argument could equally be made for the two FtP offences. If the requests for driver’s details arrived at your old address at the same time, with the same deadline for reply, it could be argued that you failed to respond to hem both “on the same occasion” (i.e when the 28 days to respond expired) and so should only receive penalty points for one. Hopefully you won’t need to go there. I think you have information about avoiding a “totting up” ban. But here’s the magistrates’ latest guidance on "Exceptional Hardship" (EH) which they refer to: When considering whether there are grounds to reduce or avoid a totting up disqualification the court should have regard to the following: It is for the offender to prove to the civil standard of proof that such grounds exist. Other than very exceptionally, this will require evidence from the offender, and where such evidence is given, it must be sworn. Where it is asserted that hardship would be caused, the court must be satisfied that it is not merely inconvenience, or hardship, but exceptional hardship for which the court must have evidence; Almost every disqualification entails hardship for the person disqualified and their immediate family. This is part of the deterrent objective of the provisions combined with the preventative effect of the order not to drive. If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can take this circumstance into account. Courts should be cautious before accepting assertions of exceptional hardship without evidence that alternatives (including alternative means of transport) for avoiding exceptional hardship are not viable; Loss of employment will be an inevitable consequence of a driving ban for many people. Evidence that loss of employment would follow from disqualification is not in itself sufficient to demonstrate exceptional hardship; whether or not it does will depend on the circumstances of the offender and the consequences of that loss of employment on the offender and/or others. I must say, I still do not understand what the solicitor means by “As a safeguard we have lodged the appeal and applied to suspend your ban pending appeal due to the time limit for being able to automatically appeal without getting leave of the Judge.” When they speak of “leave of the judge” I assume they mean they have lodged an appeal with the Crown Court. I don’t know what for or why they would do this. It seems to follow on from their explanation of the “totting up” ban. If so, I’m surprised that the Crown Court has accepted an appeal against something that has not yet happened. But as I said, i is no clear to me. Only you can decide whether to employ your solicitor to represent you in court. If it was me I would not because there is nothing he can say that you cannot say yourself. However, I am fairly knowledgeable of the process and confident I can deal with it. That said, I do have a feeling that the solicitor is somewhat “over egging the pudding” by introducing such things as appeals to the Crown Court which, in all honesty, you can deal with if they are required. I can only say that the process you will attempt to employ is by no means unusual and all court users will be familiar with it. I can also say that I have only ever heard of one instance where it was refused. In summary, it is my view that it is very unlikely that your offer to do the deal will be refused. If it is accepted, you may be able to persuade he court that the two speeding offences occurred "on the same occasion" and so should only receive one lot of points. Let me know the details (timings, places, etc) and I'll give you my opinion. Just in case your offer is refused, you should have your EH argument ready. Whether it's worth paying what will amount to many hundreds of pounds to pay someone to see this through is your call.  Let me know if I can help further.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Aplins POC's so vague HELP!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4924 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

Hi CAGGERs,

I've been milling around here for a number of years and this is post number 2 only.

I have a county court claim against me for a 2002 Sainsburys credit card that I have not paid anything against for 2 years or so.

I have dealt with at least 8 DCA's who have passed this around but finally now, Hillesden securities have instructed their solicitors, Aplins, to go for a "charging order" through Northampton CC.

I have received the claim form and acknowledged receipt pending posting my defence.

The Particulars of the claim are "The claimants claim is in respect of banking facilities provided at the request of the defendant and under which the amount shown below is now due and owing from the defendant"....

 

I have a copy of the original application form sent to me by Hillesdens which they claim does not need to have the prescribed terms on the "face" of the agreement as it is "not a fixed term agreement". (Signed 20/10/2002). This appears to me to be an acknowledgement that the terms are in fact not present.

 

Hillesdens have stated that it is not an application form and is in fact a copy of the original agreement.

 

My question is what do I put as my defence as they do not even claim that any agreement has been breached in their particulars?

 

Would I be tripping myself up if I refer to any agreement that is not referred to in the POC's.

 

I have until August 16th 2010 to file the defence.

 

Many Thanks

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi CAGGERs, (sorry, I started this thread in the successes area by mistake)

 

I've been milling around here for a number of years and this is post number 2 only.

I have a county court claim against me for a 2002 Sainsburys credit card that I have not paid anything against for 2 years or so.

I have dealt with at least 8 DCA's who have passed this around but finally now, Hillesden securities have instructed their solicitors, Aplins, to go for a "charging order" through Northampton CC.

I have received the claim form and acknowledged receipt pending posting my defence.

The Particulars of the claim are "The claimants claim is in respect of banking facilities provided at the request of the defendant and under which the amount shown below is now due and owing from the defendant"....

 

I have a copy of the original application form sent to me by Hillesdens which they claim does not need to have the prescribed terms on the "face" of the agreement as it is "not a fixed term agreement". (Signed 20/10/2002). This appears to me to be an acknowledgement that the terms are in fact not present.

 

Hillesdens have stated that it is not an application form and is in fact a copy of the original agreement.

 

My question is what do I put as my defence as they do not even claim that any agreement has been breached in their particulars?

 

Would I be tripping myself up if I refer to any agreement that is not referred to in the POC's.

 

I have until August 16th 2010 to file the defence.

 

Many Thanks

 

Loui

Link to post
Share on other sites

Search for the forum for 'Aplins' and you will find other threads with identical or very similar, but equally as vague, POC.

 

In my case, I have sent them a Part 18 request in order to clarify their POC. However, other suggestions are to enter an "embarrassed" defence or apply for a strike out.

 

Personally, I would be wary of being to quick to enter an embarrassed defence. You could probably outright deny the claim as I doubt that you have ever requested or indeed received 'banking facilities' from Hillesden.

 

Here is a link to my case http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/266553-bos-mbna-hilisden-dlc-3.html

 

Also, have a look here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/213405-hillesden-securities-ltd-dlc-4.html#post3069678

Link to post
Share on other sites

louis

 

First, you need to acknowledge service of the claim form through Northampton if you have't already done so.

 

Second, as the solicitors have sent you an 'agreement', can you hide the personal identifyers and post up an image of the document?

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

 

I have acknowledged using MCOL stating that I intend to defend all. (The date of service was 14th July + 5 days = 19th July + 28 days = last day for submission of defence 16th August.)

 

I will post the "agreement" on the site tonight, but I am reasonably convinced, having been examining it for some time, that it is simply an application form without the required terms. (As Hillesdens have already told me, the terms "do not need to be on -the face- of the document".)

 

I have noted that there is another thread almost identical to mine where the tact seems to be to present a holding defence based on the POC's disadvantaging me from making any kind of defence being as vague as they are.

 

Thanks to all so far

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Littelbert...thanks.

 

I seem to be running two threads at the same time if the site team could splice them together that would be great.

 

I did notice your thread and subscribed.

 

I think the part 18 is the way to go as these have to be the vaguest POCs ever!

 

I'm posting my agreement up tonight...

 

Cheers

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 threads merged.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

Heres the CCA that Hillesdens sent me.

Clearly an application form without the prescribed terms.

The copy is really this bad.

Hillesdens say the terms don't need to be on the document. (Face of the document anyway)

 

Observations?

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Louis,

 

Hillesdens say the terms don't need to be on the document. (Face of the document anyway)
Well, they WOULD say that wouldn't they ! :rolleyes:

 

What matters here is not whether it's an Application or a Credit Agreement, but the fact that it does not have the Prescribed Terms as you have already noted.

 

Is this the only document they've sent you or is there another page containing the Prescribed Terms, which they say was part of the same document.

 

The document is barely legible in places and could conceivably be construed as illegible for the purposes of CCA 1974.

 

However, such matters may be decided by a judge on the day and that can be down to pure luck. Decisions recently seem to have favoured the banks and a judge may be swayed by your signature on the Application.

 

You should use the "embarrassed" defence which I assume you will have seen on other threads.

 

Have you reclaimed all penalty charges that have been added to the a/c.

 

:)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Slick..and for the PM too.

 

That's a really weird thing with the PDF and floating boxes. I'll get a different type up.

 

I received the microfiche copy of the "agreement" and 8 newly written out T&C's, although there is no claim that they are part of the same document, but rather that they must have been sent to me at the time.

 

It's actually 3+ years since Sainsburys sent me the default notice (28th November 2006) at which time the balance was £6K.

 

Hillesdens are claiming £6.5K so there must be charges.

I haven't been pursuing charges as I have been focused on playing communication ping-pong with all the DCA's that have handled this to date..there have been seven of them:-

(DLC-Robinson Way-Rockwell debt collection Agency-Fenton Cooper-Nelson Guest and Partners-Wescot credit services-Oliver and Scott limited)..Surely this must be a record!

I wonder if the fact that six DCA's have passed it on might tell us something about the perceived enforceability of this agreement.

 

Louis

Edited by slick132
changed to approx amounts for anonymity
Link to post
Share on other sites

And while I think about it....I have a copy of the DN sent to me on 28th November 2006, which allowing for the service date of 2 days following posting, only allows 12 days for remedy.

 

I have noticed on a few threads, that a deficient DN appears to be fatal in a claim. Are there any special conditions that need to be met in order to make this so, or is the mere faulty construction of the DN sufficient for fatality? ( I ask because following the default notice of 28th November 2006 it is not until July 2009 that the account is assigned to Hillesdens.)

 

Cheers to all

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Default notice might not be invalid as you think. If issued prior to 19th December 2006, only 7 days were required.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks CB....I guess I'll just have to rely on an illegible, improperly executed agreement then.

 

Filed my defence today:

1. The particulars of claim discloses no cause of action and are self evidently an abuse of 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).

 

2. Further to that above the defendant is unable to plead effectively or at all. The defendant is embarrassed.

 

Also sent a CPR 18 request, as per previous posts.

 

I'll keep everybody informed.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

CB,

 

You are correct that the Default Notice Regulations 2006 did take effect from 19 December 2006. However, the change from 7 to 14 days is to be found in S14 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006. This section took effect from 1 October 2006. In effect, the old Regulations were changed with effect from 1 October and then the Regulations were updated with effect from 19 December. I believe the statute takes precedence over the Regulations, so there is a good argument that 14 days should have been used after 1 October 2006.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting because the form of the DN clearly tries to apply 14 days. It is due to the fact that they have not allowed for the required 2 days to post that it comes down to only 12 days. So it seems clear that they thought 14 days was required.

Out of interest, which is the stronger case: Illegible improperly executed application form OR Faulty DN...or is it a case of two strong arguments?

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

OK. Posted my defence well within the time frame.

Aplins have replied to me at home saying they are surprised that I have requested more particulars as they had sent me a CCA previously, but have resent them to me again anyway.

 

Can I expect them now to re-issue particulars that refer to the agreement?

Do I need to amend my defence now that they have written to me?

Does the defence stand as the particulars are so vague, or can they continue with vague particulars and say "well we sent him documents even though they are not mentioned on the claim"....

 

Obviously I don't want to fall foul of the process....

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lou I see Docman has prev been advising here-I will alert to your recent questions,.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Louis

 

It is a bit difficult to advise without knowing what you actually said in the defence you filed. Was it exactly as quoted in post #16 above?

 

You need the permission of the court to submit an amended defence. Ususally, there is a paragraph added at the end of the 'embarassed' defence asking for permission to file an amended defence if the claimant's subsequently come up with documents that support their claim and submit an Amended Particulars of Claim.

 

Can you post up the wording you used if it is different from that in post #16 and scan in the agreement again. The jpeg image is very small and with a bad copy in the first place, it is also a bit difficult to read as well.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the reply Docman.

 

The defence is exactly as posted.I did not add in any request to amend my defence as the POC's disclosed nothing at all, no reference to documents at all. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that if Aplins did not amend their POC's that the defence would stand as I have never requested them to provide me with "banking facilities", and there appears to be no case to answer.

I suppose the question is, even if they have sent me documents in the past and have corresponded with me over the last 12 months, are they allowed to make a claim with such unspecific POC's and simply rely on the fact that I must know what the claim is actually about because of all the previous correspondence, even if this is completely unreferenced in the POC's?

 

I can't repost the CCA until tomorrow when I get access to my scanner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you wait until Aplins take the next step. They have 28 days to respond to your defence or the action will be stayed. If they do go ahead and the case is transferred to your local county court, Allocation Questionnaires will be issued and then either there will be an Allocation Hearing or probably a Case Management Conference [CMC] called by the District Judge. You will need to have be ready to argue your case at that hearing (effectively you will have written out your amended defence as your argument). The DJ may order Aplins to submit amended POCs at which point you should get a further 14/28 days to file an Amended Defence.

Alternatively, they could just go for summary judgment at which point you submit a witness statement opposing the application and set out your reasons for doing so (again effectively your amended defence).

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Docman.

 

I feel pretty secure that the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable as it does not contain the required terms.

Aplins have not needed to reconstruct the agreement as they claim that the application form IS the agreement. I feel that this strengthens my argument that the terms are therefore definitely missing in the original. I have a further assertion that the copy that they wish to rely on is so illegible as to be useless to them.

 

Anyway, I'll wait to see what Aplins do next, and thanks for the heads-up.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...