Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
  • 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

CL Finance court claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4846 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

To be honest with you, this reads more like a witness statement than a defence.

 

Also, right at the start you admit that you owe the debt - so I don't see what your defence actually is. This is an admission of your liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think I'll have another crack at it, see if I can make it shorter.Tis a tad long winded Yog for a set a side

 

When I submit this to the court, can I do it via MCOL or does it have to be direct to the court?

No you instigated the set a side you submit it to the Court dealing with this matter

Andy

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicklea, I'm not disputing the debt. That's not the issue. The issue is I had an arrangement to pay £10 a month, by standing order. CL Finance or their bank started rejecting my payments, to enable them to litigate against me on the basis of non-payment, My defence boils down to the fact that I did make payment as per arrangement, and it was them that began to reject the payment, after several months of accepting it ( so there was no problem with my standing order). I then made every effort to sort it out but they did not respond to my requests and secondly, didn't serve a default notice before taking action.

 

In other words, I did everything right, and nothing wrong, and couldn't have done more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course Yog apologies long day.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right I've rewritten the defence, stripped it down to the bare facts. I'll post it on here when I get home tonight.

 

When I submit it to the court, do I need to include my evidence, or is it just the written defence? I haven't received any written instructions from the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I've completely rewritten the defence; it's now less than half the length. How does this read? I have to submit it by 4pm on Thursday, with supporting evidence.

 

I, the Defendant, am acting as Litigant in Person.

In their Particulars of Claim, the Claimant has alleged that I have failed to make payment of £xx.00 per month, from December 20xx until October 20xx, and that I am therefore in breach of a formal payment arrangement between myself and the Claimant, which honoured and continued a previous payment arrangement between myself and x Bank plc.

Furthermore, the Claimant has stated that I have been served with a Default Notice in accordance with section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which applies in this case.

Further to the Particulars of Claim, the Claimant has alleged that any payments made by me to them were cash payments, which is not the case.

In defence of this Claim, I believe, and can conclusively demonstrate, that I did make payments to the Claimant’s account, via a Standing Order from my own bank account, using the account details provided me by the Claimant, and that payments were made successfully to their account regularly each month.

The alleged breach of the agreement, which the Claimant states commenced after December 2009, is spurious. I can demonstrate that payments continued to be made to the Claimant’s account as before, but that, due to a change, error or omission on their part or that of their financial agent, my payments were rejected and returned to my account. This was not due to any lack of funds in my account, which can be demonstrated, but was due to some still unexplained circumstance entirely under the Claimant’s control.

I will show that I made repeated efforts to obtain a solution from the Claimant, vis a vis accurate or updated account details, but that they failed to respond to any of my written requests, despite my producing evidence showing that my Standing Order was as per the account details they provided, and that no payments had been missed, and that it was they who were not accepting my payments.

In respect of the alleged serving of a Default Notice, in accordance with s87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I received no such Notice, whether compliant with s88 of the Act or not. When I requested a copy of the Notice under the rules of Disclosure, the Claimant did not respond to my request, despite acknowledging receipt of my letter.

It is my contention that I did comply with the terms of the arrangement between myself and the Claimant, and that any cessation of payments reaching their account was due to circumstances wholly within their control and wholly outside my control.

It is my further contention that I did everything I could to try and rectify the situation, but that the Claimant refused or failed to take the simple steps which would have done so.

The Claimant, in failing to issue a Default Notice, prior to commencing litigation, has acted in clear breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In failing to provide me with a copy of the alleged Default Notice when formally requested to do so, they have failed to act in accordance with CPR 31.3(1).

I request that the Claim be struck out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howard Cohen & Co. Solicitors for CL Finance, have replied to my defence with a letter stating that they wish to resolve the matter without going to court and enclosing a triplicate formal agreement that their client is prepared to accept £7K by monthly instalments of £10 a month, subject to a Consent order (the triplicate form), by which I withdraw my defence. This knocks a grand off the total btw.

 

Backpedaling or what? :sad:

 

So now what? Go to court? It's tempting, as the judge would probably go berserk with them, and I think they know that. But if I don't accept this offer, the judge might go berserk with me. As said previously, I don't dispute the debt, just CLs underhand attempts to obtain CCJ and add more money to the total by fabricating spurious "arrears".

 

One other thing: when Default Judgment was given against me, I presume a CCJ will have been registered with a credit reference agency? As that judgment was set aside, ie. it was wiped out, will any record with a CRA be removed? Anyone know?:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howard Cohen & Co. Solicitors for CL Finance, have replied to my defence with a letter stating that they wish to resolve the matter without going to court and enclosing a triplicate formal agreement that their client is prepared to accept £7K by monthly installments of £10 a month, subject to a Consent order (the triplicate form), by which I withdraw my defence. This knocks a grand off the total btw. Would that make the figure correct and acceptable Yog?

 

Backpedaling or what? :sad::|

 

So now what? Go to court? It's tempting, as the judge would probably go berserk with them, and I think they know that. But if I don't accept this offer, the judge might go berserk with me. As said previously, I don't dispute the debt, just CLs underhand attempts to obtain CCJ and add more money to the total by fabricating spurious "arrears".

 

One other thing: when Default Judgment was given against me, I presume a CCJ will have been registered with a credit reference agency? As that judgment was set aside, ie. it was wiped out, will any record with a CRA be removed? Anyone know?:???:

Firstly check to see if in fact it was registered if so then that will be part of your agreement that it is removed.

Well done Yog on bringing this reaction and justifiably standing up to them.

Regards

Andy

 

 

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy,

The actual figure (which I did not dispute) was over £7,900, so they are offering to knock a grand off and accept £10 a month fixed, as I read it. No 'subject to review' or such malarkey.

 

How do I check to see if the CCJ was registered? With the court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can check your normal CRAs or here www.trustonline.org.uk

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also " By Consent " can you give more details is it a Consent or a Tomlin Order.Be careful to check the small print before you agree anything.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's referred to in their letter as a Consent Order. It's not a Tomlin Order. It's their document but starts off 'In the Sheffield County Court' etc etc.

 

Before an Officer of the Court

By consent

It is ordered that

1. The parties having agreed the terms of settlement in the schedule attached hereto, all further proceedings in this action be stayed save for the purposes of carrying into effect the terms in schedule hereto.

2. There be no order as to costs

3. Liberty to apply.

 

SCHEDULE

 

The Defendant do pay the Claimant the sum of £7,000.00 in settlement of this claim by monthly instalments of £10.00 commencing one month after date of this order.

 

The Defendant withdraws his defence.

 

That's it.

 

Wjhat does "Liberty to apply" mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats fine Yog

 

Liberty to apply simply means should you default on the monthly payment they have recourse to resume proceedings,as you do should they renege on the schedule.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, how many years is 700 months? :-)

 

To be honest, if I'm ever in a position to make them a lump sum offer of even a quarter of the total, I bet they'd bite my entire arm off.

 

Someone at their end has obviously realised that their case is almost non-existent, and that a book might come flying their way in court. Shame it ever came to this though. It's cost me money and 2 days off work, but I guess they are knocking a grand off...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing they do have is that HSBC before them had solid documentation (or at least it looks it to me) so there's no dispute over the debt.

 

What they've lost now is the 'subject to review' which was in the previous payment arrangement, and which potentially gave them scope to increase my monthly payment by getting me to fill out I&E forms every year or two. Oh dear. Poor them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...