Statutory demand Connaught old CITI Card debt

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Bump

[42man]

Put up your witness statement and I will check it for you.....

[the kid's mum]

Many thanks 42 Man

What I have got I have read from a variety of threads, I think the ordering is wrong, not sure how the numbering works aswellThis is what I have got so far - I don't know if it is relevant but they posted a stat dem a few years ago and never followed it through.

The only DN I can find was received by normal mail and gives me only 3 days to rectify which was issued from Citi a few years ago.

The defendant totally disputes the alleged debt.

EXCESSIVE CHARGES

1 - The Claimant’s charges which may have been applied to the account are unfair under Schedule 2(e) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, which state that ‘a term is unfair if it requires any consumer who fails to fulfil his/her obligation to pay a disproportionate high sum in compensation. In this case, it is likely that the alleged claimant/ or original creditor has charged an amount that is not proportionate to the amount of any payment not made.

2 - Further, or in the alternative, the claimant’s or the original claimants charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unlawful and irrecoverable at common law. (Dunlop Pneumatic v New Garage [1915] AC 79 and also Murray v Leisure Play [2005] EWCA Civ 963)

(put a copy of my soc to show this? And statements?)

THE PERFECTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT

1 I respectfully submit to the court that steps to ensure service of a notice of assignment are only adequate if the requirements of s196 of the law of property act 1925 are complied with regard to either (a) personal service or (b) postal service.

2 Since the claimant should have a sent a notice of assignment it is assumed that this was done via the postal service.The requirements for service via the post are Law Of Property Act (1925) s196. Regulations respecting notices.

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-houseand if that letter is not returned by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

3.2 - It is noted that the claimant has, at no time, provided evidence that the notice of assignment was sent via registered post, and if “sent” via any other method, the notice was not sufficiently served

3.3 -. I did not receive any notice of assignment in the format prescribed by law and served in the prescribed manner from the respondent, and I have asked the other members of my family if they signed for such a document; they have assured me that they did not.

3.4 - To the best of my knowledge, any notice of assignment sent by registered post must, therefore have been returned to the respondent

DEFAULT NOTICE (I have one from citi – a few years old and only giving me 13 days to pay) Shall I put this in or is there something else I should do?

The Need for a Default notice

Notwithstanding the above, it is also drawn to the courts attention that no default notice required by s87 (1) Consumer Credit act 1974 has been attached to the demand. It is denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant;Notwithstanding the above points, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237) Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87,88 and 89 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement. therefore without a valid default notice, I suggest the claimants case falls flat and cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

I refer to the recent restricitions placed upon 1st Credit and it's subsidiary companies by the Office Of Fair Trading(copy paragraphs - 1.1 and 1.2 (a) (d) and (f) - from here - http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/pre...quirements.pdfOn the above information

I request that the demand is set aside and I kindly ask the judge award my costs in this matter as a LITIGANT IN PERSON.I respectfully request that the court give consideration to awarding these costs on the indemnity basis or, in the alternative, on the standard basis as I believe, in any case, that they have been proportionately and reasonably incurred and/or are of a proportionate and reasonable amount.In support of this request, I would also like to refer the court’s attention to the authority of the High Court in the case of:-Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch) In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner)

Edited June 1, 2011 by the kid's mum
no line breaks

[42man]

It is looking good.....however what I think is very important here is the fact that they have provided your agreement.....on which the interest rate is COMPLETELY different to the one on your statements so they have not complied with your request or they are attempting to pass off yours as the original agreement....this is really important.

 

I think you should also mention the default notice.....but the overiding factor here is the excessive charges !!

[42man]

Does the agreement contain your original name and address ?

[the kid's mum]

The agreement - has a covering letter with it from cit and is dated some 6 months prior to me asking for the CCA, this I find rather bizzare as I didn't really know then that I could or should ask for a CCA

The 1st agreement is named and addressed however when compared to original statements there a discrepency -an initial is left out this is not dated or signed

the 2nd agreement is the one with the interest rate differences and on that one the name and address is correct but it has the county left off again this is not signed but does have a date at the top

bothe agreements are merely print offs

How should I word in regarding the agreement?

Also with DN having the 13 days to pay - I'm not sure i've made that clear enough

[42man]

So there are 2 completely different agreements ? Do either of them tie up to the interest rate quoted on the statements ?....the name and addresses may not make any difference at all....and with the default notice then you might need to take a look at this - http://www.mishcon.com/assets/managed/docs/downloads/doc_2448/HHJ_Denyer_Judgment_25_May_2010_(4).pdf I believe however that this case is being appealed at the moment..

[the kid's mum]

Aah, I suppose with that then going into too much about the DN would be counter effective.

2 agreements - 1 peoples and 1 citi

people's interest rate tallies with the very early interest rate charges

cit's interest rate charges tally with the final 2 months when the card was still operational but it is dated at the beginning of the year where they are charging a somewhat higher rate

This is what I have got agreement dated 01.2008 purchase rate 1.492, in Jn, feb, march it was 2.079 for purchases, then april and may it went to the lower rate of 1.492 for purchases.

[the kid's mum]

Me again, just want to clear up a few things.

1 On the excessive charges shall I attach on a schedule my soc and relevant statements?

2 Default notice - shall I copy the original one I have and state it only gave me 13 days or leave it?

3 State about the restrictions placed on citi from the OFT? and copy paras 1.1 & 1.2 on to the actual 6.5 form or refer to it attached on schedule or if I put it on 6.5 shall I attach the whole copy of the OFT restrictions in the schedule?

4 Not quite sure what to do about the interest rate - any ideas?

5 Shall I put in a copy of the cca and where should I mention about it if I do?

[42man]

Me again, just want to clear up a few things.

1 On the excessive charges shall I attach on a schedule my soc and relevant statements? -

Yes

2 Default notice - shall I copy the original one I have and state it only gave me 13 days or leave it? -

Yes and you should make a reference to a high court case Woodchester vs Swain

The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

 

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

 

(e) to enforce any security.

 

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

However you should be aware of Brandon vs Amex which is currently being appealed....

 

 

3 State about the restrictions placed on citi from the OFT? and copy paras 1.1 & 1.2 on to the actual 6.5 form or refer to it attached on schedule or if I put it on 6.5 shall I attach the whole copy of the OFT restrictions in the schedule? -

Restrictions on Citi ? are they relevant to your particular situation ?

4 Not quite sure what to do about the

interest

rate - any ideas? -

If they are different on the statements to what they have supplied then this is crucial that you show this...

5 Shall I put in a copy of the cca and where should I mention about it if I do? -

Yes you can but the above will cover it....

 

 

[the kid's mum]

thanks 42

When I said about restrictions I meant the ones placed on 1st Credit as they have issued us with a stat dem previously a few years ago.

the differences in the interest rate bit, I'm not sure how I can word that in - Could it go something like

In the Credit agreement (dated) the claimant states that the interest rate charged is 2000%. The claimant issued the defendant with statements with a different interest rate 8000%

and add in on the schedule a copy of the interest rate part

[42man]

I think it may help submitting the restrictions placed on 1st Credit.....and yes keep the variances in the interest rate simple....

[the kid's mum]

Hi 42,

I have sent you a pm - hope that's okay?

[the kid's mum]

2. That I ©

Do not admit the debt because

1 - The Claimant’s charges which may have been applied to the account are unfair under Schedule 2(e) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, which state that ‘a term is unfair if it requires any consumer who fails to fulfil his/her obligation to pay a disproportionate high sum in compensation. In this case, it is likely that the alleged claimant/ or original creditor has charged an amount that is not proportionate to the amount of any payment not made.

 

2 - Further, or in the alternative, the claimant’s or the original claimants charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unlawful and irrecoverable at common law. (Dunlop Pneumatic v New Garage [1915] AC 79 and also Murray v Leisure Play [2005] EWCA Civ 963)

(Appendix 1)

3 I respectfully submit to the court that steps to ensure service of a notice of assignment are only adequate if the requirements of s196 of the law of property act 1925 are complied with regard to either (a) personal service or (b) postal service.

 

4 Since the claimant should have a sent a notice of assignment it is assumed that this was done via the postal service.

 

The requirements for service via the post are

 

Law Of Property Act (1925) s196

 

Regulations respecting notices.

 

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house

and if that letter is not returned by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

 

4.1 - It is noted that the claimant has, at no time, provided evidence that the notice of assignment was sent via registered post, and if “sent” via any other method, the notice was not sufficiently served

 

4.2 -. I did not receive any notice of assignment in the format prescribed by law and served in the prescribed manner from the respondent, and I have asked the other members of my family if they signed for such a document; they have assured me that they did not.

 

4.3 - To the best of my knowledge, any notice of assignment sent by registered post must, therefore have been returned to the respondent

The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

5. In the Credit agreement dated xx/xx/xxxx) the claimant states that the interest rate charged for purchases is at a monthly rate of 1.492%, and Cash advances are charged at the monthly rate of 1.597%. The claimant issued the defendant with statements with a different interest rate showing purchases to be charged at the interest rate of 2.079% and cash advances to be charged at the monthly interest rate of 2.329% in the months of January, February, and March 2008(Appendix ??)

 

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

 

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

 

(e) to enforce any security.

 

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

 

13. I refer to the recent restrictions placed upon 1st Credit and it's subsidiary companies by the Office Of Fair Trading

 

REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING (‘OFT’ PURSUANT TO SECTION 33A AND SECTION 33D(4) OF THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 (‘the act’)

 

REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO:

1st Credit Limited (Consumer Credit Licence Number 474343), registered office: Hill House, 1 Little New Street, London, EC4A 3TR.

THE OFT REQUIRES AS FOLLOWS:

 

 

1. THAT AS OF 19 February 2009

1.1 1st Credit Limited shall not issue Statutory Demands unless:

a) it is commercially viable to do so;

b) the case has been fully reviewed and the use of a Statutory Demand is considered reasonable;

AND

c) there is a realistic prospect that bankruptcy proceedings will be taken.

d) A non-exhaustive list of circumstances where the use of a Statutory Demand is not considered reasonable is given at Annex 1.

1.2 1st Credit Limited shall not discuss legal action or the implications of such action with debtors unless one of the following applies:

 

a) the debtor is unreasonably refusing to make payment

 

14 The defendant is in receipt of a letter (dated xxxxxxx) issued by the Claimant detailing the statement of account being £xxxx (appendix ??)

 

14.1 On the above information I request that the demand is set aside and I kindly ask the judge award my costs in this matter as a LITIGANT IN PERSON.

 

14.2 I respectfully request that the court give consideration to awarding these costs on the indemnity basis or, in the alternative, on the standard basis as I believe, in any case, that they have been proportionately and reasonably incurred and/or are of a proportionate and reasonable amount.

 

14.3 In support of this request, I would also like to refer the court’s attention to the authority of the High Court in the case of:-

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

15 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner)

[42man]

You should also mention the interest rates as this could be key too.....

 

 

2. That I ©

Do not admit the debt because

1 - The Claimant’s charges which may have been applied to the account are unfair under Schedule 2(e) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, which state that ‘a term is unfair if it requires any consumer who fails to fulfil his/her obligation to pay a disproportionate high sum in compensation. In this case, it is likely that the alleged claimant/ or original creditor has charged an amount that is not proportionate to the amount of any payment not made.

 

2 - Further, or in the alternative, the claimant’s or the original claimants charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unlawful and irrecoverable at common law. (Dunlop Pneumatic v New Garage [1915] AC 79 and also Murray v Leisure Play [2005] EWCA Civ 963)

(Appendix 1)

3 I respectfully submit to the court that steps to ensure service of a notice of assignment are only adequate if the requirements of s196 of the law of property act 1925 are complied with regard to either (a) personal service or (b) postal service.

 

4 Since the claimant should have a sent a notice of assignment it is assumed that this was done via the postal service.

 

The requirements for service via the post are

 

Law Of Property Act (1925) s196

 

Regulations respecting notices.

 

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house

and if that letter is not returned by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

 

4.1 - It is noted that the claimant has, at no time, provided evidence that the notice of assignment was sent via registered post, and if “sent” via any other method, the notice was not sufficiently served

 

4.2 -. I did not receive any notice of assignment in the format prescribed by law and served in the prescribed manner from the respondent, and I have asked the other members of my family if they signed for such a document; they have assured me that they did not.

 

4.3 - To the best of my knowledge, any notice of assignment sent by registered post must, therefore have been returned to the respondent

The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

5. In the Credit agreement dated xx/xx/xxxx) the claimant states that the interest rate charged for purchases is at a monthly rate of 1.492%, and Cash advances are charged at the monthly rate of 1.597%. The claimant issued the defendant with statements with a different interest rate showing purchases to be charged at the interest rate of 2.079% and cash advances to be charged at the monthly interest rate of 2.329% in the months of January, February, and March 2008(Appendix ??)

 

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

 

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

 

(e) to enforce any security.

 

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

 

13. I refer to the recent restrictions placed upon

1st credit

and it's subsidiary companies by the Office Of Fair Trading

 

REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING (‘OFT’ PURSUANT TO SECTION 33A AND SECTION 33D(4) OF THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 (‘the act’)

 

REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO:

1st Credit Limited (Consumer Credit Licence Number 474343), registered office: Hill House, 1 Little New Street, London, EC4A 3TR.

THE OFT REQUIRES AS FOLLOWS:

 

 

1. THAT AS OF 19 February 2009

1.1 1st Credit Limited shall not issue Statutory Demands unless:

a) it is commercially viable to do so;

b) the case has been fully reviewed and the use of a Statutory Demand is considered reasonable;

AND

c) there is a realistic prospect that bankruptcy proceedings will be taken.

d) A non-exhaustive list of circumstances where the use of a Statutory Demand is not considered reasonable is given at Annex 1.

1.2 1st Credit Limited shall not discuss legal action or the implications of such action with debtors unless one of the following applies:

 

a) the debtor is unreasonably refusing to make payment

 

14 The defendant is in receipt of a letter (dated xxxxxxx) issued by the Claimant detailing the statement of account being £xxxx (appendix ??)

 

14.1 On the above information I request that the demand is

set aside

and I kindly ask the judge award my costs in this matter as a LITIGANT IN PERSON.

 

14.2 I respectfully request that the court give consideration to awarding these costs on the indemnity basis or, in the alternative, on the standard basis as I believe, in any case, that they have been proportionately and reasonably incurred and/or are of a proportionate and reasonable amount.

 

14.3 In support of this request, I would also like to refer the court’s attention to the authority of the High Court in the case of:-

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

15 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of

debt collection

where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner)

 

 

[the kid's mum]

I wrote this at point 5, do I need to be a bit more clearer over the variances?

Sorry I have changed my settings to get line breaks but can't do colour now.

 

5. In the Credit agreement dated xx/xx/xxxx) the claimant states that the interest rate charged for purchases is at a monthly rate of 1.492%, and Cash advances are charged at the monthly rate of 1.597%. The claimant issued the defendant with statements with a different interest rate showing purchases to be charged at the interest rate of 2.079% and cash advances to be charged at the monthly interest rate of 2.329% in the months of January, February, and March 2008(Appendix ??)

[42man]

Useful link on interest rate tolerances - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?169592

[the kid's mum]

Does this mean the interest rate tolerances are okay on this?

Or should I put in the apr?

as they 17.9% on the CCA and 24.9% on the statements?

[42man]

Yes I would put this on.....especially as they are outside the tolerances allowed !! which in my opinion would mean that the agreement they have supplied is either the wrong one or not yours !!

[42man]

Please do spend some time reading around these forums....so that you know your stuff, Moorhead James do tend to turn up at hearings...

[42man]

Highly unlikely you would be showed the 'deed' of assignment...that is usually a confidential document between the 2 parties, however I would request it if things aren't going your way, as it has been known that some DCA's will hike the debt in an offshore account which you could potentially question as to whether it is enforceable under UK law....just know your stuff, and you need to show the judge at how angry and upset you are at being served this demand....especially so as in general the insolvency rules are not supposed to be used as a debt collection tool...

[the kid's mum]

Well, I have just returned from a mammoth photocopying run. I will put everything into order this evening and off to the court tommorow.

When I spoke to them earlier it seems that the Judge will have a look and decide to hear/not to hear or dismiss application within 5 days of receipt of application.

[the kid's mum]

Circumstances only allowed for us to go to court today.

When we were there I had a couple of questions to ask and after the front line desk went to ask, another official came back extremely aggressive and to the point rude.

Not a good start...

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Can you say what you asked and who was the official that was agresive?

[the kid's mum]

Basically it was a query on 6.4, the stat dem is for my OH, and I wanted to know if I needed to put my name on there aswell, somewhere as I will be doing most of the talking if it went to a hearing.

She replied no, it's his stat dem.

I simply said I know but if he wanted me to act for him do I need to put my name down somewhere.

No she replied it's his, he has to fill the forms in. She could of easily said no you can't as it's his stat dem.

But then she said well it WILL GO TO HEARING very loud, slightly embarrassing aswell - as others were listening.

To which I replied but he can't see the forms properly (eye sight buggered) she replied he must fill the forms in, thrust another 6.4 at us and walked off.

To which we stayed in the office and he painfully wrote it out.

Her whole demeanor was aggressive, she was barking at us before we could say anything and I personally felt utterly demoralised with it all.