Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • a time order or time to pay form you should already have in the pack is admittance of the debt it is not avoidance of it   form-o3---notice-to-be-served-on-defender-in-ordinary-action-where-time-to-pay-direction-may-be-applied-for-actions-lodged-on-or-after-4-april-2011.doc (live.com)
    • What happens now is that the central court will send both you and the fleecers a simple form called a Directions Questionnaire, and then allocate the case to your local court in the small claims track.   Read some threads with "claimform" in the title and you'll soon get the hang of the legal process.  In fact it's essential that you gen up.    
    • Back in September my husband was at home with our 2 year old son and 5 months old puppy when suddenly a DPD driver walked into our property.  We live on a main road and the front door was wide open while he tried to take a picture of the goods inside.  My husband was shocked and furious which is understandable as open doors, main roads, puppies and toddlers don’t mix.  At the time we had a man in servicing the boiler so the front door was not locked.   My husband shouted at the guy to get out and the rude driver persisted with his attempted to picture  the package in the hallway even calling my husband “white boy” and telling him to shut up.  My husband ushered him out of the house and shut the door.  He immediately called the local DPD depot and raised a complaint to be told that someone would call him back.  This call never came.  We did not pursue this as no harm had to come anyone and DPD were obviously not interested.   Fast forward a few months and I was expecting a coin from the Royal Mint for the value of around £750.  The tracking on the delivery of this stated that coin had been delivered, then it said it had been delivered to number 2 (we are number 18).  Calling over and over again I was never supported by DPD as to where my package was.  The Royal Mint was informed it was delivered and I was invoiced £750 for the coin.  Try as I might to have this invoice removed from my name they would not budge as DPD said it was delivered.  It nearly got to court proceedings before the coin eventually landed back at the Royal Mint.  After that debacle I was frustrated, rejected another coin being sent and left it at that.   Again we move forward a few months and I am now expecting some gardening tools to be delivered that ordered from Amazon.  I had no details of the delivery but then I get an email from the seller advising me the items are on their way to them and I will get a refund.  I check the tracking information and once again DPD have returned the items. I thought this was odd but calling through to DPD offered no input as to why and they just told me to order them again.   A week later I take out a new contract with Sky for a mobile phone and on the morning I am due to get the delivery from DPD the goods are sent straight back to sky.  I was so puzzled at this point so I call DPD and ask them why. They inform me that there is no name on the parcel and due to the value of the goods there has to be a name.  I literally spend all day on the phone to sky speaking to various departments trying to get a new phone but they all inform me that I have to have a new order which means a new credit check.   I hate this idea because one credit check knocks your score by hundreds of points and takes months to build back up.  In the end they say they can send a new phone and to my relief they dispatch that night.   The next morning I wake to a message to say the phone had been shipped but was rejected by DPD and sent back to Sky.  I called DPD and was told they can’t tell me why and I must speak to sky.  I speak to sky and they tell me I have to speak to DPD.  My frustration is working overtime at this point and I have nowhere to go.   I remember I have a contact through work of someone at DPD who was trying to get my company to use DPD’s services.  She was incredibly helpful and confirms that my property has been blacklisted because the driver feels unsafe!!!  He feels unsafe!!!  He was the one who entered my home yet he feels unsafe???  My contact passes on my details to the exec helpdesk who proceeds to tell me that they are very sorry that all of this happened, they have retrained the driver however they will not remove the ban on deliveries to my property.  I ask why I cannot collect from a local drop box or shop but am informed they do not offer this service (although this is a service they promote as it saves the environment).  They say my complaint was called back but we didn’t answer however this is not correct as no call was ever received.    To make matters comical is that the same driver deliveries to my husbands place of work and he collects/delivers regularly.  He doesn’t even recognise him let alone feel threatened by him.  The exec helpdesk have said sorry for their lack of transparency on the blacklist of the address and for the bogus reasons for rejecting my parcels.  They have said sorry for not following up the call more than once and they have said sorry that delivering to drop boxes and shops is not something which they do.   They seem to be very sorry for a lot of things but it does not help me fix this issue and it impacts any further online shopping as I must now always establish who the courier is before placing orders….which is quite a difficult thing to do!   Where do I stand with this because I still don’t know what the driver is even saying happened as nobody will divulge this.  They seems to have closed ranks and are taking the drivers word as gospel over the version of events which we are not able to defend.   The lies they have told so far to me and their customers (Amazon, Royal Mint, Sky) about the bogus return reasons shows they are not a truthful company. Back in September my husband was at home with our 2 year old son and 5 months old puppy when suddenly a DPD driver walked into our property.  We live on a main road and the front door was wide open while he tried to take a picture of the goods inside.  My husband was shocked and furious which is understandable as open doors, main roads, puppies and toddlers don’t mix.  At the time we had a man in servicing the boiler so the front door was not locked.   My husband shouted at the guy to get out and the rude driver persisted with his attempted to picture  the package in the hallway even calling my husband “white boy” and telling him to shut up.  My husband ushered him out of the house and shut the door.  He immediately called the local DPD depot and raised a complaint to be told that someone would call him back.  This call never came.  We did not pursue this as no harm had to come anyone and DPD were obviously not interested.   Fast forward a few months and I was expecting a coin from the Royal Mint for the value of around £750.  The tracking on the delivery of this stated that coin had been delivered, then it said it had been delivered to number 2 (we are number 18).  Calling over and over again I was never supported by DPD as to where my package was.  The Royal Mint was informed it was delivered and I was invoiced £750 for the coin.  Try as I might to have this invoice removed from my name they would not budge as DPD said it was delivered.  It nearly got to court proceedings before the coin eventually landed back at the Royal Mint.  After that debacle I was frustrated, rejected another coin being sent and left it at that.   Again we move forward a few months and I am now expecting some gardening tools to be delivered that ordered from Amazon.  I had no details of the delivery but then I get an email from the seller advising me the items are on their way to them and I will get a refund.  I check the tracking information and once again DPD have returned the items. I thought this was odd but calling through to DPD offered no input as to why and they just told me to order them again.   A week later I take out a new contract with Sky for a mobile phone and on the morning I am due to get the delivery from DPD the goods are sent straight back to sky.  I was so puzzled at this point so I call DPD and ask them why. They inform me that there is no name on the parcel and due to the value of the goods there has to be a name.  I literally spend all day on the phone to sky speaking to various departments trying to get a new phone but they all inform me that I have to have a new order which means a new credit check.   I hate this idea because one credit check knocks your score by hundreds of points and takes months to build back up.  In the end they say they can send a new phone and to my relief they dispatch that night.   The next morning I wake to a message to say the phone had been shipped but was rejected by DPD and sent back to Sky.  I called DPD and was told they can’t tell me why and I must speak to sky.  I speak to sky and they tell me I have to speak to DPD.  My frustration is working overtime at this point and I have nowhere to go.   I remember I have a contact through work of someone at DPD who was trying to get my company to use DPD’s services.  She was incredibly helpful and confirms that my property has been blacklisted because the driver feels unsafe!!!  He feels unsafe!!!  He was the one who entered my home yet he feels unsafe???  My contact passes on my details to the exec helpdesk who proceeds to tell me that they are very sorry that all of this happened, they have retrained the driver however they will not remove the ban on deliveries to my property.  I ask why I cannot collect from a local drop box or shop but am informed they do not offer this service (although this is a service they promote as it saves the environment).  They say my complaint was called back but we didn’t answer however this is not correct as no call was ever received.    To make matters comical is that the same driver deliveries to my husbands place of work and he collects/delivers regularly.  He doesn’t even recognise him let alone feel threatened by him.  The exec helpdesk have said sorry for their lack of transparency on the blacklist of the address and for the bogus reasons for rejecting my parcels.  They have said sorry for not following up the call more than once and they have said sorry that delivering to drop boxes and shops is not something which they do.   They seem to be very sorry for a lot of things but it does not help me fix this issue and it impacts any further online shopping as I must now always establish who the courier is before placing orders….which is quite a difficult thing to do!   Where do I stand with this because I still don’t know what the driver is even saying happened as nobody will divulge this.  They seems to have closed ranks and are taking the drivers word as gospel over the version of events which we are not able to defend.   The lies they have told so far to me and their customers (Amazon, Royal Mint, Sky) about the bogus return reasons shows they are not a truthful company.   How are they able to blacklist and not tell anybody and lie to everyone involved as to why.   If anyone else needs to complain to DPD use the following email address: [email protected] 
    • Given they have presumably done this work for other properties, hopefully your complaint will now make them take you seriously and put you at the head of the queue.   If that fails and you do have to threaten or take legal action, given what you have - paper trail, promises by them to do the work at various dates, acceptance by them of their responsibility - I think you're in a great position.  You've gone the right way about this.   Let's do this.  Wait till Thursday.  Then come back here and if you've had no joy we can think about a Letter of Claim.  Legally there are various timescales which may or may not include giving them a final chance to complete the work before you do it yourself and sue them - I'm afraid I only have the vaguest knowledge of these but on Thursday we can "call in" Caggers who have years of experience with problems like yours.    Very good idea of yours to get quotes for how much it will cost to do the work.
    • Update of this Court Case  Good afternoon   I can confirm that the initial breach occurred on 28 October 2016, as outlined in the attached Witness Statement.   I have also attached all of the Witness Statements issued in relation to your case.   It is our position that your defence does not raise any grounds with reasonable prospect of successfully defending the Claim and there is no good reason why the matter should be disposed of at trial. As such we would be prepared to offer you an arrangement under a Tomlin Order for repayment of the outstanding balance at an affordable amount.   If you would like us to draft a Tomlin Order, please confirm your offer of repayment by return.     ****The court case is scheduled for July*** this does not seem correct in terms of dates to me with regards to initial breach?    I  have not signed any paperwork received a default and they have conceded they did not contact me for two years after the sale. Should I send them a CPR request now?    The court costs they have now added for themselves are over £1.5k and the original debt they say was £2.3K.     
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Some solicitors using Split Claims -- how does one defend


jimbo45
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3793 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

Update from DonkeyB to 'why do they issue these'.

 

'Actually, most people won't realise it's a split claim, or won't understand the implication. If you pay anything before judgment, you've acknowledged the debt - it's just another HFO con trick, trying to snare the uneducated and unaware'.

 

Presume therefore, you defend and only pay if you have to?

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have evidence of Carter's claims shennaigans. A claim was issued for a small amount and judgement gained by default. At the bottom of the claim form Carter had written " we reserve the right to collect the remainder of the outstanding debt of £3,000). The debtor has paid the CCJ for the smaller amount - Carter then wrote to say he wanted payment of the balance and USED THE SAME JUDGEMENT NUMBER !! and now he has issued a warrant of execution for £150 when there is no balance left the pay on the judgement. He is attempting to get installments on the balance. N244 time I think?

 

 

This may not only be an abuse of process but also illegal as per the 2006 Fraud Act AND if its a regular occurrence they can hardly claim clerical error

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumping this again: Post from Sillygirl on yet another thread with split claim:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?277628-TurnBull-Rutherford-HFO-Services-Claiming-Arrears(3-Viewing)-nbsp

 

NO,, do not do an 'embarrassed' defence here, you have ABSOLUTE defence in that they are only claiming part of the account so state

 

"The defendant does not recognise where the PARTIAL SUM of xxx comes in the claimants defence, the defence itself is poorly particularlised, even given the restraints of the bulk issuing system and therefore the defendant denies this partial sum is owed.

 

The defendant is a litigant in person and requires sight of the following documentation to enable a proper defence to be entered.

 

Original agreement showing original sum owed

Full payment details on original sum owed

Original Default Notice

Explanation of PARTIAL SUM claimed on this claim

Explanation of UNSPECIFIED amount still deemed to be owed AFTER PARTIAL SUM CLAIMED

 

The defendant believes that the claimant is trying to split the claim which is not allowed by Civil Procedure
link3.gif
Rules.

 

Send in that and Turnbull will be stuffed.

 

Sorry, but an embarrassed claim will not help at the moment, you need to act fast and make sure you get a printout of the online acceptance - they do sneak claims in on the button, but with printed proof you have sent a defence and it is accepted it can be overturned at no cost to you.

 

I am alerting others of the HFO fanculb to this thread.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sillygirl also advises the following letter to the court but I have been a bit wary of advising this when the defendent first receives a claim as an immediate response may result in the claimant withdrawing this and submitting one for the full amount, (when the split claim could actually be to the defendents advantage). I suppose there is good reason to inform the court when submitting a defence? Any thoughts on this?:

 

'write a covering letter to the court, addressed to the Court Manager and the Senior Circuit Judge to alert them to the split claim, just keep the letter simple and say "Dear xxx, the claimant in this case seems to think they can split their claim, please can you read the particulars and advise the claimant as to the legalities of a split claim.

 

I also want this letter to be taken as formal complaint as the claimant clearly wants to put the defendant in an unequal position with the split claim."

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As stressed if you do not inform the court separately of the legal firms split claim nothing much will happen until the defence is read - if it is just 'processed' as many courts are now doing (outsourcing court work should be BANNED) then it will be completely missed as the 'processor' will not have the legal training needed to spot the mistake.

 

Addressing both the court manager and the senior circuit judge will hopefully make the people responsible sit up and take notice that they are being taken for mugs - something NO judge or court takes lightly.

 

It is high time the likes of Turnbull Rutherford, Bryan Carter and the many other 'solicitors for rent' as I like to term them are brought to task.

 

Hope that clears some speculation up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw Palomeno' thread.

 

I am getting the feeling here that the rules are only being broken when the claimant goes back to claim the remaining balance - which they would do if they thought that the defendent/court had not realised what was going on.

 

This has been my concern with using the split claim as a defence as you can't prove they intend to do this.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The relevent passage relating to split claims is:

 

County Courts Act 1984 Part II, 'Miscellaneous provisions as to jurisdiction', Section 35, 'Division of causes of action' 'It shall not be lawful for any plaintiff to divide any cause of action for the purpose of bringing two or more actions in one or more of the county courts'.

 

Which suggests that you have to actually apply for both parts of the claim to be in the wrong. When they apply for the first part - you cannot prove that they intend to apply for the rest. However if you defend the first claim and loose, paying the small amount - you can then defend the second claim.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if there's been some seminar, event or DCA press article that has said this is a good method of chasing debtors. It seems too much of a coincidence that its use is suddenly mushrooming. Maybe new case law? Time for an extensive Google...

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been a seminar, it was mentioned in the pages of Credit Today... they all gang up when somebody finds a way of harrassing 'delinquent debtors' that hasn't been tried before and legally can't hold water... I think they meet every 3 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why I think that this needs to be handled with caution - people in this situation need to look at all the factors in their defence, not just the split claim.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Abuse of Process – Henderson v Henderson

 

Henderson -v- Henderson – 1843 – Sir James Wigram VC – Litigation Practice

The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.

Sir James Wigram VC said: “In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I say that, where a given matter becomes the subject of litigation in, and of adjudication by, a court of competent jurisdiction, the Court requires the parties to that litigation to bring forward their whole case, and will not (except under special circumstances) permit the same parties to open the same subject of litigation in respect of matter which might have been brought forward as part of the subject in contest, but which was not brought forward, only because they have, from negligence, inadvertence, or even accident, omitted part of their case. The plea of res judicata applies, except in special cases, not only to points upon which the Court was actually required by the parties to form an opinion and pronounce a judgment, but to every point which properly belonged to the subject of litigation, and which the parties, exercising reasonable diligence, might have brought forward at the time.”

Cited by:

Wain -v- Sherwood & Sons Transport Ltd CA (); Time Group Limited -v- Computer 2000 Distribution Limited and IBM United Kingdom Limited TCC ([2002] EWHC 126 (Technology)); Ansari and Another -v- Barclays Bank Plc CA ([1997] EWCA Civ 3055, [1997] EWCA Civ 3055); Gwendolen R Tilly -v- Hamleys of London Ltd Essex County Council CA ([1998] EWCA Civ 1767); Johnson -v- Gore Wood and Co (a Firm) CA ([1998] EWCA Civ 1763, [1999] BCC 474); Johnson -v- Gore Wood & Co HL ([2000] UKHL 65, [2001] 2 WLR 72, [2001] 1 All ER 481, [2002] 2 AC 31); Motorola Credit Corporation -v- Uzan and others (No 2) CA ([2003] EWCA Civ 752, , [2004] 1 WLR 113); The Sennar (No 2) HL ([1985] 1 WLR 490); Anyanwu and Ebuzoeme -v- South Bank Students’ Union South Bank University CA ([1999] EWCA Civ 1032); J A Pye (Oxford) Limited -v- South Gloucestershire District Council CA ([2000] EWCA Civ 268); Barrow -v- Bankside Members Agency Limited CA ([1996] 1 WLR 257); Yat Tung Investment Co Ltd -v- Dao Heng Bank Ltd PC ([1975] AC 581); Sweetman -v- Nathan and others CA ([2003] EWCA Civ 1115, [2004] PNLR 89); Arnold -v- National Westminster Bank Plc HL ([1991] 2 AC 93, [1991] 1736); Celador Productions Ltd -v- Melville ChD ([2004] EWHC 2362 (Ch)); Blackburn Chemicals Ltd -v- Bim Kemi Ab CA ([2004] EWCA Civ 1490, ); John Edwin Berry -v- Post Office Investigation Department CA ([1996] EWCA Civ 926); Hormel Foods Corporation -v- Antilles Landscape Investments NV ChD ([2005] RPC 28, [2005] EWHC 13 (Ch),); Phipps, Regina -v- CACD ([2005] EWCA Crim 33); Occidental Exploration & Production Company -v-Republic of Ecuador CA ([2005] EWCA Civ 1116, [2006] 2 WLR 70, [2006] QB 432); Dallal -v- Bank Mellat ([1986] 1 QB 441); Coulter -v- Chief Constable of Dorset Police CA ([2005] EWCA Civ 1113); Ganesmoorthy -v- Ganesmoorthy CA ([2002] EWCA Civ 1748, [2003] 3 FCR 167); Heffernan and Another -v- Grangewood Securities Ltd CA ([2001] EWCA Civ 1082); Vervaeke -v- Smith HL ([1983] AC 145); McBride -v- The Body Shop International Plc QBD ([2007] EWHC 1658 (QB)); Anyanwu and Another -v- South Bank Student Union and Another HL ([2001] UKHL 14, [2001] 2 All ER 353, [2001] 1 WLR 638, [2001] ICR 391, [2001] IRLR 305, [2001] Emp LR 420); Munir -v- Jang ([1989] ICR 1); Divine-Bortey -v- London Borough of Brent CA ([1998] EWCA Civ 830, [1998] EWCA Civ 831, [1998] EWCA Civ 832); Dimtsu -v- Westminster City Council EAT ([1991] IRLR 450); Campbell -v- Leeds United Association Football Misc ([2009] EW Misc 4 (EWCC)); Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and Others -v- Fattal and Others CA ([2009] EWCA Civ 297);

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from Bryan Carter

 

'“As you are aware we have previously issued proceedings against you in respect of this matter …”

 

“We had hoped for suing for a small amount initially we would minimise costs to both parties and thereby ensure that the debt was repaid without the necessity for further court action..”

So that is why they do it.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still not finding any evidence for using the 'split claim' argument when the first claim is issued unless, the POC states explicily that there will be further action to make a claim for the balance.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from Bryan Carter

 

'“As you are aware we have previously issued proceedings against you in respect of this matter …”

 

“We had hoped for suing for a small amount initially we would minimise costs to both parties and thereby ensure that the debt was repaid without the necessity for further court action..”

 

 

 

So that is why they do it.

 

I would not say that is why he does it, he's a Billy bullshi**er. It's a numbers game, and in this scenario keeping his numbers down. His costs. That above is just his crappy talking the talk.

 

Hey Bryan chuck, I am still grateful and forever indebted to you (not) for your genourous split claim.

 

I love him for this, as should everybody else!! Of course, peeps need to be wise to his tricks which isn't easy when you don't know how. But keep threads like this up and it will, quite brilliantly, hit him in the knackers where it hurts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just dear Bryan now but also Turnbull Rutherford and another bunch of chancers in Southend! The last one is interesting as they are claiming for 'arrears' and then seem to imply that if there are 'arrears' in the future they will claim for them again, the 'remaining balance' isn't mentioned.

At your Service

 

Please Double click the Star and leave a message if I have helped you

 

Please support CAG and they will support you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...