Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. 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 particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 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 Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
    • Atsushi Katsuki tells the BBC the firm sees the sober generation as both a risk and an opportunity.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

Virgin/MBNA passed to Optima - claim forms received - help! ***ICO dismissed****


gem77
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4035 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

Just google Mercantile Credit Co Ltd v Ellis in 1987.

 

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

  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well not quite you will arm yourself with the case but your main contention is that its already been discharged and you have not defaulted on a installment order and nothing as changed since it was discharged.The Claimant as no right to reapply or been given leave to.

 

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

9. According to 'Section 86(1) The County Courts Act 1984:

‘Where the court has made an order for payment of any sum of money by instalments, execution on the order shall not be issued until after default in payment of some instalment according to the order.’

 

10. This point was further considered in the case of Mercantile Credit V Ellis in The Court of Appeal 1987, where it was found that the wording of the Charging Orders Act states quite clearly that no further action could be taken without a default in payment.

 

‘For my part, I would hold that where the circumstances established that an order for payment by instalments has been made and has been observed, then in any event it would be impossible to attack an exercise of discretion where that discretion was exercised in favour of a debtor (now a judgment debtor) faithfully discharging the terms of the judgment order itself.

So far as the jurisdiction point is concerned I have only one matter to add. Reliance was placed on the fact that under Section 1(1) of the Charging Orders Act 1979 the charge may be imposed in order to secure "the payment of any money due or to become due under the judgment or order." Those words appear to me to be wholly without significance for present purposes, when one observes that Section 86 of the County Courts Act 1984, having first imposed an embargo on the execution of the order until after default in payment of some instalment according to the order, goes on to provide by subsection (3) as follows: "Except so far as may be otherwise provided by county court rules made for those purposes, execution or successive executions may issue if there is any such default for the whole of the said sum of money and costs then remaining unpaid or for such part as the court may order either at the time of the original order or at any subsequent time; but except so far as may be otherwise provided by such rules, no execution shall issue unless at the time when it issues the whole or some part of an instalment which has already become due remains unpaid."

11. Following a review of charging orders by the Office of Fair Trading in 2010, it was stated in their press release on 22 November 2010:

‘2. A charging order is one of a number of enforcement methods available to creditors to ensure that judgment debts are satisfied. A charging order can only be applied for where a court judgment has already determined that a debtor owes money to the creditor, and payment under that judgment is not forthcoming.’

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Andy and cymruambyth. I will Make a note of that. But you are right Andy I am mainly going to rely on the fact that they have put in a false claim for a second time and the first time it was thrown out. Surly if a judge lets them get away with it its like giving the creditors an open door to do whatever they want they might as well give them all baseball bats and say its ok to beat the money out of your debtors like an illegal loan shark would. :shock:

 

Sorry I get a bit het up over this as thought it was all over and done with only for it to jump up and bite me again. :sad:

 

So glad I got you guys for guidance and understanding. Dont know where i'd be without you.

 

x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Got a letter back from the land registry today saying after considering my objection they are satisfied it is groundless because the CO in question has not been cancelled by the court.

 

Just seems very unfair to me that they can put in a faulse application and get the intrim CO without question. Obviously the judge who agreed to it only looked at the application and not the whole case. so surely these **** bags can get the interim CO's on anyone they wish. Doesnt really seem like fair justice to me :|

 

So off to court again we go in March.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In all fairness Gem the LR are not in a position to either accept or reject your objections, there is no CO to be canceled at the court it still remains an ICO and your objections will be considered in March.

 

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

Very true but all will become clear when you state you case and fight it vigorously in March:wink:

 

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

  • 6 months later...

Hi all so sorry I have not been on here for so long for one my laptop decided to go puff and i have only just got back on line with my old pc which is slow

and a complete nightmare also at the CO case in march they kind of put the wind up me so wanted to lie low for a bit. But here is what happened

 

I was a bit stupid and when the solicitor (yes they turned up this time) approached me asking if he could have a quick word

I was stupid enough to tell him the situation of being here before and that the application was completely incorrect.

 

He was totally unaware of any of the facts and quickly hurried away to ring MBNA

I then relised what did I do that for :x.

 

I got flustered when he approached me and when he started going on about no payment plan was accepted I just saw red and blurted it all out. me and my big mouth.

 

the judge was a nightmare and seemed to be one that was on the banks side great :roll:

It looked like he was going to award them the CO for a while.

 

Their excuse for not turning up last time was that they thought it had been adjourned due to my pregnancy issues

that is what put the wind up me that they have obviously been closely monitering this thread as there would be no other way they knew

unless they have access to my medical records and social networking site :shock:.

 

They also said they didnt relise the paperwork was incorrect or it would never have been submitted

the judge believed all of it and stated he doesnt think any of this was done intentionally.

I only wish my brain had been working but I was so dumb founded about the pregnancy statement

i didnt know what to say until afterwards it occured to me if they had read this thread and found out i was pregnant

then surely they knew the paperwork was all wrong as well as it is all down here in black and white :|.

 

I really did think this is it the judge is going to award it to them

he was thinking long and hard for a while

 

then he said they could not have it has they had had 2 chances and got it wrong both times

and to teach them to take more care over their paperwork they could not have their CO.

 

The solicitor then asked if they altered the paperwork and resubmitted it could they appeal,

Oh great I thought here we go again,

 

But thankfully again he said no you have had 2 chances to get it right so i do not give you permission to appeal

 

as long as I keep up payments they were not allowed to try again.

 

PHEW! I didnt even go there again with charges as like I said the judge was so on their side not like the last one.

I just counted myself lucky it went how it did.

 

So I thought it was over

 

but got a letter the otherday from MBNA that they are selling my debt to Marlin Europe II ltd.

 

Can they do this if I have a ccj on the debt and what does this mean for me

 

am I going to start getting hasselled again by this new company

 

can they take me to court to try to get a charging order or change the judgement.

 

Sorry once again for the long abscence. and thankyou for your replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they can sell it.

 

But the CCJ is now the agreement – no more interest can be charged on it, and the CCA bit is redundant.

 

Marlin may or may not know there is a CCJ in place. From your point of view, simply keep making the payments to MBNA.

 

Marlin will have to have themselves replaced as the claimant in the case,

and they will have to apply to the court to do this (if they know about it),

if they want to collect any money.

 

DO NOT change your payment in favour of Marlin unless you are furnished with a court order replacing them as the claimant in the case.

 

There is a court-agreed payment in place, and Marlin cannot change this without applying to the court

(and I doubt your circumstances have changed, so they’d get nowhere).

And of course, before they could even do this, they have to take the steps described above.

 

For now, best thing is to keep paying MBNA and see what transpires from Marlin.

 

Judging by their recent performances, they won’t have a clue...

and if they start making ridiculous demands in ignorance of the facts, then we can go to town on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Bit more development.

 

I have never had any other paperwork to state Marlin have put their name on the ccj r

 

eceived a letter offering a reduced settlement figure from optima legal as it would appear marlin are keeping it with optima

(it is them my standing order is set up to)

I just ignored this as I didnt have the funds obviously.

 

Today I receive a letter from optima ( headed without Prejudice) stating the agreement is now due for review and ordering me to complete

the enclosed income , asset and expenditure form, provide proof of income, significant expenses such as rent or mortgage and other debts and to return it within the next 7 days.

 

Oh and to top it all off they've added over £1000 extra on top of the original outstanding balance. :evil:

 

Can they demand this of me as I have a ccj?

or am I right in thinking that the amount the court ordered me to pay can not be changed without going through the court again and that it stands for the remainder of the dept?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

correct

 

it worries me they are offering a discount

 

this means there is something wrong with the debt.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply DX. Not sure how much the discount was for will have to dig out the letter and not sure where it is as I just dismissed it. Could have been for the £1000 they have decided to add on and trying to make themselves look good and understanding for offering to reduce it.

 

Should I write a stern letter asking them how they got to the outstanding liability figure which is what they are calling it and they I am not legally obliged to give them all my financial details?

 

Gona try to find that letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...or they are just stupid.

 

Can you remind us what the terms of the judgment order were?

 

From memory, I’m pretty sure you had an application dismissed because your payments were up to date?

 

Unless the original judgment order allows for interest, then no charges can be added, and unless the judgment allowed for a regular review, then they cannot change your payments without making a further application to the court.

 

So dig out the original judgment and tell us what it says.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine the original court order allowed for interest to be added to the amount.

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine the original court order allowed for interest to be added to the amount.

 

Only if its in the T&Cs of the agreement (PJI) and the judgment was above 5K.

 

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

Well finally got the order through from the court. It states as follows:

 

It is ordered that:

 

1. There be summery judgement for the claimant in the some of £5***.** + £575.00 Costs and fees payable at £18.00 per month, 1st Payment on 1st March 2011.

 

2. Permission to claimant to apply for a charging order notwithstanding payment of instalments under the judgement.

 

So does that mean that they can only apply for a charging order if I do not keep up the repayments?

 

Here we are.

 

No interest allowed by the judge.

 

So they can whistle, and the judge set the payment level too.

 

Complain to the OFT about this too. They have absolutely no right to demand an I&E form from you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...