Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking 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.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
    • what device are you using? copy all the questions then come here to this thread and paste them. then answer each question click on red give answers here. when done  hit submit reply bottom right.  
  • 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

GE Capital / Santandar to Howard Cohen. Court papers issued


Herb
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4851 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

Hi All,

I took out a BHS store card in 2002 and due to unemployment and other issues have been unable to make payments lately.(store card maximum was £250)

At some point Santandar have taken over from GE Capital and I received a notice from Northampton in December stating that something had been filed by Howard Cohen for £420.00

I sent an “embarrassed defence” in January and Howard have replied last week with a GE contract and four statements maximum dated 2009 and 2010.

I do not know what my next step should be and i was thinking that good people here would be able to help.

Many Thanks,

Herb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alfwithair,

 

I don’t have the POC to hand but will post the details here later.

 

hi alfwithhair,

Yes the store card was for £250.00,although in years i have been charged late payments and not making payments.

 

I wrote to them and other creditors in September 2010 with a budget breakdown and my income with me requesting to pay £1.00 which was rejected.

 

I have not been able to make payments at all and now they want me to pay £400+

 

Since entering my defence i have not heard from the courts although i have received a letter and GE credit agreement from Howard and friends!

 

Regards,

 

Herb

Link to post
Share on other sites

It not that clear, but even though it an application form it does seem to contain all that is necessary.

One thing that does puzzle me is Cohen's statement of why they can't supply NOA.

I have never heard of Santander using Cohen's. CL Finance/Lewis's are Cowen's bum chums.

They are correct in that Santander own GE Money now, but is very unusual, if fact I have never seen it for the original creditor to take action using this slimy bunch of solicitors and especially not for a few hundred quid.

 

It ponders the question, are they rearly acting on behalf of Santander? I am sceptical on that one.

Now they want you to pull your defence.

I smell a rat.

 

I think you need to get a CPR request off to Cohen's ASAP

 

The POC would be a great help. We can see whats what then.

 

I have seen a few recent threads around the various advice sites regarding Cohen's starting court action on ex store cards, which they claim have turned into credit cards, but no new agreement signed.

 

Did you receive a Default Noice from Santander?

Have you had any notification from Santander regarding this account?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is odd. Santander don't directly instigate proceedings. They pass it to the Lewis Group, which encompasses a few DCA's.

 

Do the CPR 31.14 request.

 

If it hasn't been assigned, then a copy of the instruction from there client.

Have they supplied the Default Notice.

 

I'm afraid the application/agreement looks good. So you need to concentrate on looking at the procedures followed prior to instigating the claim.

 

Go through the statements & deduct all those charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is odd. Santander don't directly instigate proceedings. They pass it to the Lewis Group, which encompasses a few DCA's.

 

.

 

Thats exactly what I thought.

I think their asking for you to pull the defence might be to try for judgement by default.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The claim form from Northampton states "the claimants claim is for the sum of £420 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under a regulated credit agreement made in writing under reference XXXXXXXXXX.

 

The defendant has failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1) of the consumer credit act 1974.

the claimant claims the sum of £420.

 

Speaking of Lewis Group-i have just come across a letter from Howard Cohen that came in the same week as the county court form which says that if i want to discuss the county court claim i should contact LEWIS DEBT RECOVERY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something not right here.

Cohen state they are acting for their client SANTANDER, but they then say to contact LEWIS. Therefore the account MUST have been assigned to them.

But Cohen say it hasn't?

 

They again mention a Default Notice in the POC. Have you received a Default Notice ?

 

I am not an expect on the legal side of things, but, as far as I am aware LEWIS cannot initiate court action unless they are the LEGAL owners of the debt. So the account would have to have been sold to them. Having said that, they would be refering to their client as 'LEWIS then. As they are not, it would be assumed they are only acting as agents for SANTANDER. There is also no mention of an assignment in the POC.

 

Yes Cohen can start proceeding for SANTANDER but not without being instructed to do so.

 

A CPR 31.14 request is the way to go here I think.

 

You need some expert advice from one of our legal eagles on the site rearly as to what you need to request.

I am sure we will get to the bottom of this.

 

There might not be much in the way of replies today as its weekend, but sure someone in the know will be available tomorrow

Sit tight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did do a CPR31:14 about 5 weeks ago as soon as i made the defense to northampton and what came with the attached letter above from Cohen was a default notice from Santander dated end april 2010.

 

Its all puzzling.what should my next step be? will the courts write to me in due course?

 

the fact that the default notice received is dated 6 months old could it mean that its actually lewis and not santander?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post the DN on here (minus personal details) so we can have a gander.

Have you checked your credit file recently to see if this default is recorded on it..

 

You need to look back through all the Letters from both LEWIS and SANTANDER. See if any of them state this account has been either SOLD or LEGALLY ASSIGNED and when

Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked this up from another threat that may be appropriate

 

In order for the original creditor to sell (or assign) the debt to someone else- YOU have to be informed- and the law of property act says that you must be served with the Notice of Assignment- this must be by personal service or by some form of "recorded" delivery (signed for by you).

 

if you are not thus served- then the assignment has not been lawfully completed- so if the claimant in any proceedings against you is not shown as the original creditor- then they have no "cause of action" - in other words they cannot satisfy the court that they are the proper owners of the debt since you were not served properly.

 

thus their claim cannot proceed against you.

 

there may of course be other arguments in defence

 

(OP Diddydick)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response. So if the DN is defective due to Santander stating when all should be remedied by what should i do now?

 

The DN is dated in May 2010, i have removed the date for ID purposes. i.e the DN sender could look up the date and trace my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...