Lloyds TSB : Lloyds taking me to court?????????? *** Discontinued ***

[foxyflugel]

I received the last docs from my SAR and there is only a few docs there. They have sent me a supposed SAR reply and it does not have any statements with it at all. Neither does it have the letter where they replied to me with the recon t&cs stated (I have still got that though) - it just has a few letters from me and their replies. There is also nothing where it shows the debt being passed on to the various DCAs and the numerous phone calls they have made to my landline number (albeit they weren't answered - some messages were left). There is no copy of the DN either. What are they playing at??

 

Foxy

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Foxy,

I've just had another good look at your thread..

Looking at the app form (at 200% zoom). As you noted earlier, on the second sheet you can see the corner of the first sheet. The corner matches, so I think we can assume that these were microfiched at the same time and that it's therefore probably the original T&C's.

All the prescribed terms appear to be there.

The DN they originally sent is compliant.

 

So what does that leave us with for a defence, people? All hands on deck here as for Foxy's sake it's decision time.

 

• ? interest rate on the first statement after execution. They haven't supplied the statements with the SAR. Foxy, you would need to write back by recorded and state that you require statements for this period urgently. Also send a section 18 request to ask what the interest was on the first statement
  
• ? is there any mileage in the fact that it's only a microfiche
  
• can anyone think of anything else?
  

Bearing in mind that at the outset the decision to defend was based on a patently inaccurate recon and their statement that they couldn't find the original, what is now the best way forward:

Continue to defend?

Time Order?

Negotiate a repayment plan if they withdraw claim?

 

Just my own honest opinion, Foxy, please don't shoot the messenger, but in view of the above I wouldn't want to see you go through all this on what is now looking like a poor defence.

 

I'd appreciate other comments/ideas for the best way forward. I hope someone can pull something out of the bag!

 

Elsa x

[andrew1]

Producing the original agreement is usually a ploy, but some judges are known to accept certified copies although some here will disagree and put up an argument for that. I got caught on that one on a diabolical copy the finance co sent in the SAR and the judge accepted the one their rep produced in court which was a perfect copy of a template with no names or sigs on. -I argued a proper defence could not be argued, but he'd have none of it. Lottery I'm afraid. Doesn't tip the scales too far in foxy's favour though as it would be chancing things IMO to rely on that alone. checking the APR and terms etc maybe?

[Undercover-Elsa]

Thanks Andrew..

still racking my brains for a way through this for Foxy...might need to "phone a friend" as I'd hate her to have to give in to these bullies.

[Undercover-Elsa]

I've mentioned this thread to a couple of other people, here's one response:

 

No DN !!!!

 

I would be making an app to Court for a Strike Out no cause of action. They have responded to CPR request and failed to respond with a DN even though it was originally disclosed by them and requested by ff

 

Ok, it WILL fail BUT, ff's only way now is to build an unfair element to the case.

IMHO she should be thinking about an S129 Time Order or something like that with an unfair bit attached.

Look at the thread and the way she has been treated, look at the original CCA response and the actual copy they are different by the sounds of things.

Also the fact they say it is not available then produce it - all 'playing with her'

 

S140 is powerful, if ff can persuade a DJ she is not evading but just trying to make affordable payments and the Claimant is being obstructive then that will obviously help.

 

So, I would either make a CPR31.15 app for a copy of the DN with a draft unless order

Or, make a strike out app due to no DN (and possibly failure to comply with the original S78 request as the info supplied was wrong)

 

 

Many thanks for that

Sounds good to me...any thoughts from the team?

[foxyflugel]

Hi guys and thanks for your replies. It's not looking good is it?

 

When they sent me the recon agreement - it stated the £12 charge instead of the £25 it used to be - however - on the T&Cs that came with the application form there is no mention of these that I can see - if someone could double check - I also don't think that they have included everything that is on the microfiche T&Cs. They also sent me a letter saying that they could not find the agreement but would keep looking and send it to me when they found it - which they have failed to do until I SARd them - this is ironic really as they could have sent it me when I first asked them for it. Does this have any weight on the case?? - as this could have possibly been avoided if they had been honest (ha) and complied in the the 1st instance.

 

Elsa - how do I word the request for the CPR 31.14 docs - they have only sent me the application form and I requested copies of -----the agreement----- the DN ----- statements ----- and the termination notice. This was sent on the 23rd Feb - I would have thought that I would have had them by now.

 

 

Thanks for your replies

 

Foxy

[foxyflugel]

The recon does differ but I have just read the guidance that they sent with it and they state that they are allowed to send a current set of t&cs to comply with sec 78???

 

I'm totally lost with this and they only extended to 22 April to have my defence in by.

 

Just looked am my previous thread and by the dates on there - their reply said at the latest within 28 days from the date of my CPR 31.14 request - which was 8th March - so they have until 8th April to send the docs to me.

 

Foxy

Edited April 6, 2011 by foxyflugel

[pt2537]

Hi

 

May i ask, do you actually have the default notice? and also when was it served on you, was it between 2008 and 2010?

 

There is a very good reason why i ask

[foxyflugel]

Hi pt2537 and thanks for taking a look at my thread. I posted this on one of my earlier threads when undercover elsa asked if I had the default notice : -

 

I am unsure as to whether I have found the default notice (if not I shall continue to look) - I have found a doc that says default notice - it does state my balance and the arrears amount - it's dated 29th June 2010 ands gives me until 19th July 2010 to pay the arrears.

 

I'm intrigued now.

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

that will be the default notice

 

can you post a copy please, very very important

[foxyflugel]

Will do pt2537 - but it will be later - will do it as soon as.

 

Cheers

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

given this may be win or lose here, the sooner the better really

[foxyflugel]

Hi - sorry for the delay - my scanner is playing up.

 

I have attached the 1st page of the default notice - they are asking for the arrears in this doc.

 

Thanks

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

too small,

 

Does it say words to the effect of

 

"This notice should include a copy of the current Office of Fair Trading information sheet on default. This contains

important information about your rights and where to go for support and advice. If it is not included, you should contact

us to get one.".]

 

AND WHAT WAS THE DATE ON THE NOTICE

[Lou]

Hey Foxy!

 

Your image is very tiny - don't know if it can be enlarged or another copy required? Just thought I would mention it as it seems to be urgent! All the best.

 

Lou

[foxyflugel]

Cheers Lou.

 

pt2537

 

No - it doedn't say anything like that. It says:-

 

If the action required by this notice is taken before the date blah blah and if it's not blah blah.

 

Then on the 2nd page it says

 

If you are having difficulty in paying any sum owing under the agree't or taking any other action required by this notice you can apply to the court which may make an order allowing you or any surety more time.

 

If you are not sure what to do, you should get help asap, for example you shoudl contact a solicitor, your local trading standards or your nearest CAB.

 

The date on the notice is 29th June 2010 and it gives me until 19th July 2010 to pay the arrears.

 

Thanks

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

then your notice does not contain the statutory wording required by para 10a of schedule 2 of Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices)Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561)

[foxyflugel]

What do I do then pt2537??

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Mercantile/2011/B3.html

 

 

read paragraph 75 of that case

[foxyflugel]

The bit about bad notices?? Which can then be corrected??

 

Ps - I still haven't received the docs under my CPR 31.14 request - they had until today to send them as I have to submit my defence by 22nd April.

 

Foxy

[pt2537]

The notice of enforcement was a statutory pre-condition of enforcement. It was a bad notice and enforcement cannot be attempted in dependence upon it

 

it was more that point of law that i was concerned with

 

legal submissions can be made to say that the missing info is of extreme importance, the notice thus is bad and no enforcement can be taken in dependance on the bad notice

[Lou]

I wish they would talk in normal sentences!! One minute your hopes are lifted (in this case mine for your!!) and the next is quite negative sounding surmises! Does this mode of language get learned in law school and do they speak it at home I wonder? I am still none the wiser as to the implecations of paragraph 75 or the last sentence where he ends......

[pt2537]

i am talking as clear as i can do

 

you cannot enforce on the back of a bad notice, this is what the case law tells us, btw Harrison was my case so i am fortunate to have the insight into that case too.

 

You have a bad notice, it cannot lead to enforcement

 

what more can i say? what more do you want me to say?

[Lou]

That it is good news for Foxy or just a little bit in Foxy's favour??

[pt2537]

well, as it stands, its good news, but one cannot say what the opponent will do, so i cannot say its the winning point