Claimform/ Link/GE capital/woodchester

[Bazooka Boo]

Yes correct, once sold they will be unable to rectify, if in fact it has actually been sold and they are not merely the gophers in between.

[roygoodbeat]

Sorry. Been reading this.

 

Have an old mbna. They issued an invalid default notice (Was for full amount) not arrears, and the account was sold during the default period. At the time there was no deed of assignment, just a letter from Experto saying Varde Investments had been sold the account.

 

I wrote to mbna and varde stating that I had accepted the recission of contract. I also asked for the arrears at the time.

 

Nothing came back, loads of calls, no repsonse to my subject access request from mbna.

 

Now almost 6 months later I get a new default notice, dated 4 days ago and given 14 days from that date to pay the new owner for the full amount.

 

Can they do this and where do I stand?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The salient point is does the first

default show on file with a new date,

together with the old default.

If they are it is wrong there can only be

ONE default on any debt.

However an new owner of a debt can

amend the credit file with their details

but CANNOT change the original default

date.

Edited September 22, 2011 by BRIGADIER2JCS

[ltc1607]

Hi Roy I am expecting another any day and from `what I can gather we dont have a leg to stand on I am going to try and come to an agreement with them.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Roy, Check you CRA files to see

if to separate defaults have been

registered.

[elrib]

Hi All

 

Does anyone know if the s127(3) has been repealed by the 2006 amendments to the act, and what this would mean.

 

I have a ongoing case where this is part of my defence as they do not have a signed agreement. and the claimant are saying that as this was repealed that it would be up to the court to determine if a agreement was signed.

Thank for any help.

E

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi,

Depends when your agreement was taken out. The revision only affects agreements made after 6th April 2007, it's not retrospective for earlier agreements imho.

Edited September 26, 2011 by Undercover-Elsa

[elrib]

Hi undercove-elsa

 

thanks for your info, the agreement was 2004,

e

[OnMyWayOut]

Sounds like a breach of CPUTR - attempting to force you into a decision by providing deliberately misleading information.

[elrib]

hi onmyway out

 

that was part of the witness statement which has been sent to the court, also included a few comments about internet sites,

does anyone know if it is document somewhere to say that the 2006 amendments can not be inforced prior to that date.

e

[OnMyWayOut]

I don't know, but I'm sure someone else will be able to point you in the right direction.

 

OMWO.

[citizenB]

This is the relevant Act of Parliament

50. Firstly I will address the issue of which Act is relevant in this case, to avoid any confusion in case it is suggested that the claim falls under the Consumer Credit Act 2006. It is drawn to the Court’s attention that Schedule 3, Section 11 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 prevents Section 15 repealing Section 127 (3) of the 1974 Act for Agreements made before Section 15 came into effect. Since the Agreement would have commenced prior to the inception of the Consumer Credit Act 2006, Section 15 of the 2006 Act has no effect and the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the relevant act in this case.

 

51. For the avoidance of any doubt I include the relevant section of the 2006 Consumer Credit Act, namely SCHEDULE 3, Transitional Provision and Savings:

 

11 The repeal by this Act of-

 

(a) the words “(subject to subsections (3) and (4))” in subsection (1)

of section 127 of the 1974 Act,

 

(b) subsections (3) to (5) of that section, and

 

© the words “or 127(3)” in subsection (3) of section 185 of that Act,

 

has no effect in relation to improperly-executed Agreements made before the commencement of section 15 of this Act.

 

52. Therefore, the Consumer Credit Act 2006 is not retrospective in its application and has no effect upon this Agreement. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the Act which regulates the Agreement.

[elrib]

Citizen b

 

Thank u for that, That will do it, in court end of oct will update on outcome.

 

el

[Undercover-Elsa]

CitizenB you are a star! I've been looking all over for that. Can you remind me what case it's from?

 

Elsa x

[citizenB]

CitizenB you are a star! I've been looking all over for that. Can you remind me what case it's from?

 

Elsa x

 

Erm, sorry.. It was just a bit that I hijacked from a post and I havent a clue where

[elrib]

HI All

 

Do anyone know when the 7 days was change to 14 days as I read somewhere that this took place prior to 2006.

thanks

[dx100uk]

dec 2006 i think

 

dx

[elrib]

HI

 

Looking for some advice on the following, in short

 

I was given a CCJ on a loan last week loan dated 2005,

the evidence was base on a microfish copy of an agreement and only one page,

also the claimant in they statement say that the orignal lender has the orignal agreement.

which the judge tended to believe but did not request them to produce it.

 

CCJ given and appeal not allowed.

 

But the Judge did say that if I can show that the original lender did not have a orginal agreement as the claimant

( claimant being DCA who purchase debt) stated in they wit statement then he would view this as new evidence

and I would be able to bring this back to court.

 

So could I now use CPUTR 2008 to get the original lender to give a yes or no to whether they have or ever had an original agreement

and if so where is it and if its been destroyed, then when.

 

Now one more point I do have the original agreements as when I sign them in my home

the guy just took a photo copy of them and thats how they got the microfish copy,

 

El

[dx100uk]

i'd post in the legal forum

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?170-Legal-Issues

 

dx

[elrib]

HI

 

Looking for some advice on the following, in short

I was given a CCJ on a loan last week loan dated 2005, the evidence was base on a microfish copy of an agreement and only one page, also the claimant in they statement say that the orignal lender has the orignal agreement. which the judge tended to believe but did not request them to produce it.

Any way CCJ given and appeal not allowed. But the Judge did say that if I can show that the original lender did not have a orginal agreement as the claimant ( claimant being DCA who purchase debt) stated in they wit statement then he would view this as new evidence and I would be able to bring this back to court.

So could I now use CPUTR 2008 to get the original lender to give a yes or no to wether they have or ever had an original agreement and if so where is it and if its been destroyed, then when.

Now one more point I do have the original agreements as when I sign them in my home the guy just took a photo copy of them and thats how they got the microfish copy,

 

El

[Ganymede]

Hi,

 

So you have all the original signed documents?

[elrib]

Hi Ganymede

 

Yes I have the original sign documents, ie the original plus office copy and clients copy,

I only sign the original so the others were not sign.

 

I worked from my home then and made the copy myself,

and when the agent left he only took the copy I made,

 

this was his mistake and they did send me a letter later asking me to send the original

but they had already paid the loan over to me and i just forgot to send them.

So all they have is a A4 copy of the sign original.

EL

[elrib]

Hi All

 

Have a ccj and claimant will not accept my offer of payments and the courts have taken their side and going to allow them to go for a charging order if they wish, on my house, the origanal debt was for 5,500 but with court cost it now 7,000.

Is there anway I defend this after all it was a unsecured loan to start with.

Thanks for any help

E

[AndyOrch]

Hi Elrib

 

Have you ever requested a variation N245?

 

Andy

[elrib]

Hi Andy

 

After being given the CCJ I was order to pay within 28 days,

 

I then put in for a variation went back to court as the DCA rejected my offer,

 

As it was clear that I could not pay anymore than what I had offered

 

the judge just said that they could go for a charging order, a

 

nd could talk to them or go to CAB, not had the info from court yet as this was only yesterday.

Elrib