Statutory Demand - time nearly up

[bert73]

hi forum, i recieved an SD notice dated from CapQ at the end of december, the debt was bought by them from barclaycard (about 7k) 6 months before. Notice of assignment was sent to my old address, as was the SD, and I have only just recieved it.

 

. I was unable to pay their myriad of collection agencies (DML, Russel aitken, HL legal, nelson guest, wescott etc for very long, each with their own barrage of threatening letters and calls. These particular letters were sent to my current address/last known to them address where i am still at now, so I've no idea why barclay/cq have used my old one for a SD and notice of assignment, unless they intend for me to miss their post and press ahead with their petition. The last payment to agents of barclaycard was 3 years ago.

 

Anyhows the 18 days from the date on the SD letter was today, and am a bit worried of what to do at court tomorrow for the affidevit, I tried to call barry davies but would not be put through to him of the error of the correspondence address, I made the operator know that I tried to call him and he logged the call.

 

Also since i stopped paying, all the letters mention sums owed within a range of 400 pounds (i.e. 6994.34, 6706.34 etc etc) even the sums with capq mentioned in the letters (on behalf of etc) vary slightly both up and down, i assume

 

Also should I cca capq straight away? I cant imagine that they would have bought the debt without the original cca (it would be about 10 years old by now) or am i wrong??

 

Any advice on what to do next, time really seems a bit tight, I am aware that 1st class post can take 3 days so by their method of delivery could have arrived at my old address around 3rd january, which may give me a few more days if the judge sees fit that I was served.

 

thanks bert.

[FORMISTER]

Hi bert, welcome to the forum. I'll try and get some of the more experienced caggers to advise you asap.

Edited January 17, 2011 by FORMISTER

[DonkeyB]

Was the SD sent recorded delivery, or by some other verifiable method?

[slick132]

Hi Bert,

 

See here for some info about SD's - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162131-Statutory-Demands-and-Service-By-Post

 

8-)

[bert73]

Was the SD sent recorded delivery, or by some other verifiable method?

 

definitely post, A4 window envelope 1st class , pobox in bristol as return to sender address, and a sort of elongated barcode on envelope.

 

but no one in my old flat bothers to do RTS, which is sort of handy as i havent bothered with a redirect.

[DonkeyB]

My initial reaction then is to ignore it completely. Suggest you PM andyorch and 42man for their input.

[teaboy2]

Anyhows the 18 days from the date on the SD letter was today, and am a bit worried of what to do at court tomorrow for the affidevit, I tried to call barry davies but would not be put through to him of the error of the correspondence address, I made the operator know that I tried to call him and he logged the call.

 

On the point quoted above that you stated - If i am correct, then the fact they failed/refused to put you through to the person named as person of contact on the SD makes the SD invalid. That and the fact it was not served in person or by recorded delivery, put's you in a good position for it to be set aside.

[42man]

Am I correct in stating that they delivered it to an old address ? This would never stand up in court.......they have made no attempt at personal service, so if it was me I would ignore it. However, I think a SAR and a CCA request to the original creditor might be a wise move in case they attempt this again.

[DonkeyB]

Am I correct in stating that they delivered it to an old address ? This would never stand up in court.......they have made no attempt at personal service, so if it was me I would ignore it. However, I think a SAR and a CCA request to the original creditor might be a wise move in case they attempt this again.

 

My thoughts exactly, 42man. Though the service is, it seems, deliberately wrong!

[FORMISTER]

Hi Bert , how did you get on?

 

And thanks to the caggers who I PM'd last night to get Bert some help in a hurry. I don't like to give advice on something I haven't had a lot of experience with

[harrassed senior]

In pre-CAG days and knowing no better, I ignored an SD from Cr=appy and that was 2 years' ago. Never heard from them again!!

[FORMISTER]

Ahhh the dark old days. I used to ignore them all, including CCJ's, but alas , eventually the mail behind my TV pushed it off the sideboard

[diddydicky]

before you ignore the SD (which is what i would normally advise) i note that you asked the operator to log the call you made in an attempt to speak to the person mentioned in the SD

 

it would be very unwise- in these circumstances- for you to deny receiving the SD IMO

 

if you have acknowledged (even if inadvertently) that you were served with the SD then then any argument as to the method of service goes out the window

[bert73]

before you ignore the SD (which is what i would normally advise) i note that you asked the operator to log the call you made in an attempt to speak to the person mentioned in the SD

 

it would be very unwise- in these circumstances- for you to deny receiving the SD IMO

 

if you have acknowledged (even if inadvertently) that you were served with the SD then then any argument as to the method of service goes out the window

 

Hi thanks for the feedback, I read the heavyweight article on ignoring it vs the set aside, and reason that it would take a good few days of trawling through the paperwork to get at least 3 concrete reasons to convince a judge for a SA.

 

In any case I only picked up the SD a few days ago, so if it did go forward I would have at least have a witness to say I picked it up weeks after it was delivered.

 

Re: the call, I asked to speak to the person named on the SD but i did not say why and did not leave a message or reference number, but gave my name, aware that the call was being recorded I mentioned nothing of a SD, just asked to speak to him. If they use the call to prove i was served should I call another 2 times to bolster the setaside approach if i've already "let the cat out of the bag"?