Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  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. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   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? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3858 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

Frantically busy over the New Year it seems.... they wrote to me again as well. We must be so blessed... :rolleyes:

 

The usual drivel in both cases and much of what's in yours has been taken from one of their templates, it seems...as the content is the same; word for word, to a response I received some time ago. Although they threatened to resume 'phone contact however, they never did. ;)

 

Difficult to say what their next move will be, but they want you to believe that they've got sufficent docs. to make your life uncomfortable, although they've never mentioned the word "enforeable"... only a reference to proving the "existence" of an account at some point in time. Not the same thing under CCA 1974 lads.... :rolleyes:

 

You could play letter ping pong.... and thank them for their recent correspondence, but until such times as they're able to produce an enforceable copy of the CCA that they allege to hold, that no payments will be forthcoming; as is your right under CCA 1974; sec 127 (3).... or something like that, if you want to. They are a prime example of a company who like wordplay.... so it's nice to be able to let them know how they've shot themselves in the foot sometimes.

 

Alternatively, you could await their next move... as that letter doesn't really threaten anything apart from 'phone calls

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i notice from their last missive that they may escalate your account!!! they did to me they took it too their PRE LITIGATION DEPARTMENT!!! funnily enough it is the same number as their normal collections department, but I think when you ring, I imagine all these bells and sirens start going off and the computer screen comes up in big letter PRE LITIGATION DEPARTMENT... and the threat monkey then decides that they are really important and start threatening you with all sorts of dire retribution if you do not wish to contribute to their coffers..

when I refused to pay...re no cca..invalid etc etc...take me to bloody court!!! threat monkey quoted...YOU DONT DECIDE IF IT GOES TO COURT....WE DO!!!!????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to really clarify my thoughts please

 

Scenario:

 

DCA(1) starts the aggro, so they are sent a CCA 78. They fail to provide anything.

 

Time passes.

DCA (2) )( or indeed it may by now be via several others) moves in and provides what may or may not be enforceable.

 

Am I correct in thinking that despite whatever DCA2 provides or says or threatens, they have no power to proceed with any avtion as they are to be considered "Third Party Intervention" as the CCA is still in default/dispute with the first DCA?, and if so what should I say to DCA2 to shoot them down?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I think I disagree with the above posts. Whilst DCA1 may have been in default of the cca request, the Act is clear that once the relevant documents have been provided, the debt then becomes enforceable again.

 

The courts have made clear that passing on an alleged debt is not necessarily enforcement action and, as such, an assignment can be made.

 

In the case of a simple or equitable assignment (DCA 2 acting on behalf of DCA 1), DCA 1 would still be responsible for providing the documents. In the case of an absolute assignment, DCA 2 would also have been assigned the duties to rectify the default.

 

Once this default has been rectified by them furnishing you with the relevant documents, they then reinstate the right to proceed with any lawful method of recovery.

 

I cannot see any court accepting that a debt is not enforceable just because DCA 1 defaulted on your request.

 

By all means argue the toss.... but in my opinion it is better (even if doing so) to begin to prepare far stronger arguments. This way in the event that DCA 2 do take court action; you are far better prepared for the event.

 

As always, the above is just my opinion.

 

Hope this helps.

Cheers.

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without a NOA, this is a slightly different kettle of fish. But experience shows that under a SAR these people normally come up with something acting as a NOA; all be it that we're sceptical as to the validity of these documents.

 

I feel that the courts have continuously shown a reluctance to question the NOA's that these people come up with.

 

On that basis, if they can come up with something that purports to authorise them to act on the alleged debt, then DAC 2 would still be able to do so; as long as they come with the relevant documents.

 

I am far from an expert however, and so more experience members may put my thoughts to bed once and for all.

 

Cheers.

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems! Always enjoy discussions such as this.... you never know what pearls of wisdom might appear from it!! :)

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never interpreted the Act as saying that; as far as I know, as soon as any DCA in the future provides the relevant documentation, the debt once again becomes enforceable.

 

I think the courts would be very loath to imply any other interpretation. Also, if it were the case that if the first DCA was in default of the request then no other DCA could bring an action, then very few claims through the County Court would be successful.... and as we can see this is not the case.

 

So, whilst there is every chance I am wrong, I still think that as the law stands, once the paperwork is presented to you by whatever company is currently chasing you; the debt becomes enforceable.

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It concerns me slightly that Cabot have supplied some paperwork for things which may or may not be enforceable/or if not enforceable comply with a CCA , BUT these are documents which are outstanding from a CCA request of just over two years ago from B O Scott, I think that the onus of responsibility still lies with BOS and Cabot are breaching 78(6)( I think) but I would like to be sure

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received nice little postcards from Cabot

 

Now obviously I have blanked out personal details, bar code and refs etc, but could these be said to be "revealing details" to the wide world? they came as postcards, not in envelopes

 

Well it doesn't take much to type Cabot Financial into google and find out what they do. So I would say that this is a breach of your privacy. The postie might well know now that a debt collection agency is trying to contact your urgently.

 

Regards.

 

Fred

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cabot are pure chits and that is against OFT guidelines. Send a copy of the card to the OFT with a complaint. Every complaint is another nail in their coffin and the way they are pursuing debts right now they are breaching OFT guidelines left, right and centre to do so. Watch Cabot lose their licence if they go on like that.

 

Enquiries and Reporting Centre

Office of Fair Trading

Fleetbank House

2-6 Salisbury Square

London

EC4Y 8JX.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unbelievable... did they address it to Mr Debt Avoider, Wontpay, Ihavefinancialissuesshire?

 

You'll need to quote the relevant parts of the OFT debt collection guidelines. Here's a link to the guidelines, and here's the offending bit, below.

 

Full guidelines on the right as PDF on this page:

 

Debt collection practices - The Office of Fair Trading

 

 

Physical/psychological harassment

 

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either deliberately or through lack of care, for example, by not putting correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox, thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this company are total pratts that do not know whats happening on the desk next to them , in the last year ive gone from pre-litigation to its now with our solicitors , to a full and final offer then the stupid letter stating one of these will happen if you dont pay , then back to pre littigation , then either a doorstep collector or court proceedings and now to another reduced offer of full payment , and i'm sure it will go round again

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought, from the various observations on these forums about AHH Communications that these were not good, and I am most obliged for your thoughts.

I shall copy these cards and make a formal complaint, I shall also tell those stupid Barstewards in West Malling that they have breached OFT Guidelines and if they want to play hard, I'll see/take them to court for the various breaches of law that they have so far committed ( as detailed in this thread)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...