Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. 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. 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 24/12/2022. 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 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: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
    • Always send with proof of posting from your Post Office, so there is a trail. Conversations , are designed to intimidate into paying, Emails are designed as another way of bombarding. Only EVER communicate in writing, by post.  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4755 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

:???: On Monday, 25th April 2011 I got in touch with a Solicitor online who specializes in U.K. consumer protection and consumer rights. Subsequently, I would like to have a second opinion about the ongoing dispute between me and the landlord. The following is a copy of the correspondence between me and the Solicitor:

 

Monday, April 25, 2011 2:51 PM(GMT/GMT)

 

 

I recently had a dispute with my landlord on Wednesday, 13th April 2011 and I decided that under those circumstances my status as a tenant was no longer tenable. I asked him how much notice I would have to give to vacate the property and to have my initial deposit of £260 refunded; but I did not specifically give notice to terminate my tenancy agreement on any particular date. He said he wanted me “out of the house by Tuesday (19th April 2011)”; which I interpreted as an implied verbal contract between the two of us (which he sent me as a text message to my cellphone). Normally, I am required to give 1 month's notice to terminate the agreement, or else I would lose the initial deposit of £260; but on this occasion, I believe the verbal contract takes precedence over the official tenancy agreement between me and the landlord. The fact he advised me to vacate the property by 19th April 2011 was a de facto proposition on his behalf for us to terminate the contract on the above date. However, I no longer have the original text message containing my landlord's instructions advising me to vacate the property on the above date. It’s inexplicable that somehow the original text containing his instructions is no longer held on my mobile phone, although I have no specific recall about deleting the message.

 

As it happened, I started removing my belongings from the house on Friday, 15th April and I didn’t manage to remove all my stuff until Monday, 18th April.

 

Subsequently, I received another text from my landlord on 24th April 2011 telling me that I owed him £300 rent for the calendar month 18th April to 17th May 2011, which is based on the premise I failed to give him 1 month's notice and the contract is still legally in force.

 

However, I no longer have the original text message on 13th April 2011, whereby, my landlord specifically asked me to vacate the property by Tuesday, 19th April 2011. Consequently, I am concerned about the alleged rent I still owe him; plus the fact, I am concerned about the deposit of £260 which my landlord said he would use to settle a large percentage of this month's rent in the event that I still wanted to give notice to vacate the property; and my landlord said that I still owe him £40 in addition to losing my deposit of £260, which is on account of the rent being £300 a calendar month. I believe the situation is unfair because I am no longer living at this address and my decision to leave was based on the premise of what he'd initially said to me on 13th April 2011; which he sent as a text message to my cellphone.

 

Moreover, I held onto the keys to the house until Wednesday, 20th April 2011 because I had some unfinished business to attend to. I had to go back to the house to give my old room a good hoover and I left the keys inside a small envelope in the kitchen before leaving the property for good. Given that I spent less than an hour inside the property during my last visit on 20th April, I’m not sure whether this is a de facto breach of the verbal contract between me and the landlord; and whether this would make me liable to pay the monies which he suggested I owe him. Consequently, I am now afraid it would be neither easy nor straightforward to bring any successful legal action against my landlord to recover my deposit of £260; and I would still be liable to pay him £40 in light of this month's rent which I am supposed to owe him for the period 18th April to 17th May 2011.

 

Henceforth, I would like to have a professional, definitive answer from a qualified Solicitor who is licensed to practice in England & Wales as to whether there might be any chance at all I could still bring a successful legal action against the defendant, my landlord, in view of the fact I no longer have the original text from him on 13th April 2011, whereby, he specifically asked me to vacate the property on Tuesday, 19th April 2011. I would like the answer to be based on case law in England & Wales as to whether it might be possible to bring a successful legal action on the basis that there is no existing hardcopy (or text) to show that the contract was terminated on 19th April 2011. Whereas, the original tenancy agreement is a document which still exists, this same cannot be said of the text message which he sent me on 13th April 2011; which was to effectively cancel the tenancy agreement without the usual requirement of 1 month's notice on Tuesday, 19th April 2011. On the basis of case law, I would like to know whether there is any chance whatsoever I could still bring a successful legal action against the defendant, my landlord, to recover the deposit of £260 and to void his claim that I still owe him £300 rent for the period 18th April to 17th May 2011.

 

I would like to have professional advice as to what would be the best course of action for me to take in light of the above circumstances. Please contact me as soon as possible.

 

 

Monday, April 25, 2011 3:00 PM(GMT/GMT)

 

 

 

Hiya

 

 

On the basis that you have a text from him advising you to leave on or by the 19th April and you left on that date then you have a good claim to not owe any money and on the basis that you are returning the property in its original condition to get your deposit back. I would actually threaten to take him to the small claims court if you can not resolve this.

 

Happy to discuss

 

 

Monday, April 25, 2011 3:30 PM(GMT/GMT)

 

 

If I took him to a small claims court do I need to provide evidence of the original text which no longer exists? I suppose the judge or magistrate in a small claims court is more likely to take my word for granted without any evidence of the original text (which no longer exists!) because a private dispute such as this is usually settled according to a lower standard of proof. Private lawsuits are usually settled according to the "balance of probability", which is a lower standard of proof compared with the majority of criminal prosecutions, which require a much higher standard of proof. More often than not, criminal cases are resolved according to a much higher standard of proof, which is "evidence beyond reasonable doubt." In my particular case, this private dispute between us could be settled in a small claims court on the balance of probability, which does not require me to produce evidence of the original text. Is this the underlying principle behind your answer?

 

 

Monday, April 25, 2011 3:35 PM(GMT/GMT)

 

 

 

There is a different burden this is correct. Also the landlord will know that he sent you this text and would not want to be seen to lie in court :!:

Edited by enquiring.mind
To improve the general appearance of the thread.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello enquiring.mind, welcome to the CAG.

 

Enjoy your visit, but take some time to look around the forum and understand where everything is.

 

 

It can seem confusing at first but you will start to find your way round and to understand what a helpful community we are.

 

You haven't received any replies to your post yet. Try posting your query again in a relevant sub-foum. You will get the help and support you need there.

Please be advised that my time will be limited for the next few weeks.Thanks for your understanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you have been advised, your landlord knows he sent you the message....

 

He does not know that you don't still have it.

 

I would suggest a bit of bluff calling, and follow XoAmyox suggestion.

I am not a solicitor :!::!:

 

Most of my knowledge came from this site :-D:-D

 

If I have been helpful in any way at all .............. Please click my star..... :-(:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice is applicable only if the rented premises are entirely within England and Wales, and only if you were granted a shorthold tenancy (under which you [and your spouse/partner/children if any] had exclusive use of a seperate dwelling, which was not shared with another tenant nor with the landlord) and you were over 18 years of age when the tenancy was granted.

 

 

If you leave the premises without first validly ending the tenancy, the rent continues to accrue, and can be deducted from the deposit; and you can be sued if the deposit doesn't cover it.

 

There are two ways for you to end a shorthold tenancy if it is a periodic tenancy in which the rent is payable monthly: you can give not less than one calendar month's notice in writing, expiring on the day before a rent day (but if the tenancy agreement requires a longer period of notice you must give the notice which the agreement specifies); or you and the landlord can agree an immediate surrender, by a deed signed by you both. In this situation, the rent ends when the notice period ends, or on the date the deed of surrender specifies, respectively.

 

If there is a fixed term tenancy (e.g. a 12 month fixed duration, or a 6 month fixed duration) you can't give notice to end the fixed term early, unless a provision in the agreement - called a 'break clause' - allows that, so the rent keeps running until the next tenant moves in (although the rent can't continue after the last day of the fixed term, so that date is the long-stop). But you and the landlord can, ALTERNATIVELY, agree an immediate surrender, by a deed signed by you both; and if so, the rent ends on the date the deed of surrender specifies.

 

A re-letting of the premises by the landlord also ends the tenancy, and ends the tenant's continuing rent liability with it, because re-letting is an act incompatible with the continuation of the original tenancy.

 

 

In my opinion, a verbal agreement will not amount to a valid surrender of a tenancy.

 

To create, or to vary, a contract - including a tenancy contract - the parties must adhere to the normal rules for the creation of a binding agreement: namely an offer, acceptance of it, and consideration. In the circumstances discussed, there is normally no consideration given by the landlord or the tenant: indeed quite the reverse, since the tenant is being released from the continuing liability to pay the rent.

 

A deed of surrender is the normal method for giving legal effect to a surrender of a tenancy, because a contract by deed (i.e. under seal and witnessed) is exempt from the requirement that the contract must be supported by consideration.

 

What normally brings the letting to an end in such cases, and the tenant's rent liability with it, is the re-letting of the premises by the landlord, i.e. an act incompatible with the continuation of the original tenancy agreement, not the invalid contract of surrender. In your case the landlord seems to have no intention of reletting; but if he does relet it would normally have the effect I've described.

 

 

A tenant being sued for rent arrears might seek to rely on the highly uncertain vaguaries of an estoppel, which is a discretionary remedy only; but he must take legal advice from a Solicitor on that highly technical and specialised legal defence. That would be based on an invalid verbal agreement to surrender.

 

A surrender might, at best, bring to an end the rent liability; but it will not - unless, perhaps, if professionally prepared in writing, by deed - prevent the landlord suing for disrepair or other breaches of the terms and conditions of the letting.

 

 

A precautionary notice to the landlord seems to be necessary, if you desire to give notice to end the tenancy for sure at the end of the next rent period, i.e. on 17th June. But see a Solicitor, because it will need to be very carefully worded, so as not to create a new tenancy - or revive the original tenancy by accident - nor to prejudice any case you might have for claiming that the tenancy has already ended.

Edited by Ed999
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...