Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What type of finance is it?   HP, PCP, Loan? They want her to ring so they can bully her into making payments she can't afford...unless she can record her calls then IMHO, I'd keep everything in writing. Is £400 SSP her only income? There's no chance they will justify taking half of that.   Lodge a formal complaint with them ASAP, exhaust it, and then you can escalate it sooner rather than later, ruddy sharks!  
    • 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: _____________________
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Dlc - hillesden securities - black horse finance


soli2008
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4899 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

I have been in dispute with Black Horse Finance for some time now (for reasons that I don’t think I need to go into here) & they have now “sold” the debt on to DLC (Hillesden Securities), who have recently begun to chase me for payment.

On 22nd of November I sent a CCA request using the template on this forum. It was received and signed for by DLC on 23rd. Today (2nd December) I have received the attached letter.

I’m at a loss as I don’t really understand what this means. They seem to be saying that they can’t supply an agreement (having requested it from Black Horse apparently) but despite this fact they still intend to continue “collection activity” – in other words they are choosing to ignore the fact that they are unable to comply with my request and are carrying on regardless (or that’s how I read it).

Can somebody advise what I should do now please? Are they acting in a correct manner, or are they simply ignoring the law?

Do I need to respond to this letter? Or should I just wait until they contact me again?

All advice will be very much appreciated.

Many thanks

Hillesden Securities.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard template, simply saying that they will continue to process your data with the CRA's whilst they try to source your agreement. They are unable to take any LEGAL recovery action, so they cannot take you to court whilst they are still unable to provide you with your request.

So once they are out of time (12 working days from receipt of your rerquest) You should send them the 'failed in dispute' letter and withhold ALL payments until such time that they do provide the docs.

If they fail to find it, then you can submit them with a S10 notice to tell them to stop processing your data.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard template, simply saying that they will continue to process your data with the CRA's whilst they try to source your agreement. They are unable to take any LEGAL recovery action, so they cannot take you to court whilst they are still unable to provide you with your request.

So once they are out of time (12 working days from receipt of your rerquest) You should send them the 'failed in dispute' letter and withhold ALL payments until such time that they do provide the docs.

If they fail to find it, then you can submit them with a S10 notice to tell them to stop processing your data.

 

Many thanks for that Bazooka Boo - I shall sit tight until the 12 days have expired. Where will I find a "failed in dispute" letter please? Also, what is an S10 notice and at what point do I send them that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes don't worry just yet about a S10 notice, this is the 'failed' letter you will need to send them when they are out of time.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Soli,

That letter is actually an excellent result. As above, it may not stop them asking you for the money but it means that the account is unenforceable in court until they do fulfill the request.

Send them the account in dispute letter as above.

A link to the template and more info is in the debt help blog:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/entry.php?180-Debt-Threats-a-quick-self-help-guide

 

kind regards,

 

Elsa x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks to everyone for all the great advice given – very much appreciated.

I have this morning received a letter (attached) from solicitors acting for Hillesden/DLC which suggest that they are pursuing legal routes despite them not yet supplying the information I have asked for & the account being in dispute.

Can anybody suggest how I should respond to this letter please – do I need to reply or should I just ignore it? If I do need to reply, what do I say?

Many thanks

Aplins.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

hehe

 

another threat-o-gram

 

ignore totally

 

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

As long as the 12+2 working days is up since you sent your CCA request, you can send it now. Get proof of postage and make sure you keep a copy of the letter.

 

It isn't quite - I posted on 22/11 & the received on 23/11 - so the 12 + 2 is up next Tuesday (I'm presuming weekends are included in the 12 days).

 

I sent the CCA request to DLC but got my reply (as my orginal post, above) from Hillesden. To whom should i send my dispute letter? I'm guessing Hillesden?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't quite - I posted on 22/11 & the received on 23/11 - so the 12 + 2 is up next Tuesday (I'm presuming weekends are included in the 12 days).

 

I sent the CCA request to DLC but got my reply (as my orginal post, above) from Hillesden. To whom should i send my dispute letter? I'm guessing Hillesden?

 

 

And I'm going to ignore the Aplins letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it ironic how, if we send anything important to them, they have to respond within "working days" from day of receipt whereas if they send anything important to us eg a DN we have (according to a misguided judge) to respond in calendar days from the day they post it.

 

Coincidence?

I don't think so!

 

:eyebrows:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it ironic how, if we send anything important to them, they have to respond within "working days" from day of receipt whereas if they send anything important to us eg a DN we have (according to a misguided judge) to respond in calendar days from the day they post it.

 

Coincidence?

I don't think so!

 

 

 

:eyebrows:

 

 

Anyone would think you're cynical!:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at that letter, it is clearly printed off by a computer on it's normal threat cycle, if it had any human input they would know whether you were Sir or madam, in fact they would address you directly.

And another point to note, the signature, clearly there is no-one with just the name 'Aplins' so if these charlatans can use such signatures to sign off documents, why when you begin flexing your rights do they then try to hide behind the DPA, which they have no knowledge of?

Because they are second rate, tin pot, knuckle dragging, immature oxygen thieves!

I'm going to start signing with an X, perfectly legal to do so...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand though why people get so worried by these types of firms - they send out very official looking paperwork all tied up in legal jargon. I would imagine that the vast majority of people just pay up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes agreed, it used to scare me something chronic before I knew my rights, now I welcome their letters, just for something to do...currently waiting for TV licensing to pass on an imaginary debt to Idiot Iqor, I love dealing with their shambolic call centre...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does give a feeling of empowerment, I agree. First came across this forum a few years back when I was fighting with a place called Welcome Finance, and it was life saver. The help I received was fantastic and I beat them! This time too the help has been quick, very clear (to a novice liek me!) and extremely helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...