Hfo turnbulls court proceeding pls help!!

[patrickq1]

who was this solicitor that was their representing hfo ?

by the sounds of things this judge needs to be questioned about his behaviour , he the Solicitor didnt happen to be in the judges chambers before you got to court did he

took the following transcrpt from P1 thread cputr... perhaps donkey can revise it and send it to both alice and this other solicitor

"In light of the complete absence of any enforceable documentation, I am concerned over xxxxxx'x persistent attempts to pursue payment on an unsubstantiated debt in defiance of OFT guidelines and the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008 by now passing “instructions” and personal data to yourselves. According to your letter these are in fact instructions from instructions, from your client’s clients, leaving me to assume that neither your client nor your client’s clients have actually informed you of the facts surrounding the unsubstantiated debt that they have instructed you to pursue and it’s current legal unenforceability under The Consumer Credit Act 1974; sec 127 (3). I have also assumed that your clients have also failed to mention my recent request for confirmation under CPUTR (2008) on xx/xx/xx either; a request that remains outstanding to this day due to the reluctance of your clients to provide an answer one way or the other.

 

Under the circumstances, should you now decide to accept “instructions” from your client or your client’s clients in the continued absence of any enforceable documentation from anyone at all and/or fail to confirm upon request whether you, your client (xxxxxxxx) or your client’s clients (xxxxxxxxx) currently hold or have ever held a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement (Consumer Credit Act, 1974) in your/their possession under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008, then you, your clients and your client’s clients will be falling foul of ss.5(2), 3(b), 6 and 7, their actions/activities will be added to existing complaints and your company will be reported to the Solicitors’ Regulatory Authority without any further notice.

 

It would appear that xxxxxxxxx have already breached CPUTR (2008) anyway by failing to confirm or deny their possession of such an Agreement when requested to do so on xx/xx/xx (by recorded delivery) and passing “instructions” to you regardless.

 

Please therefore take note that this letter serves as an additional formal request under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR, 2008) for written confirmation as to whether xxxxxxx (solicitors), xxxxxxxxxxx, and/or xxxxxxxxxx currently hold or have ever held a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement in your/their possession pertaining to myself and if not, to kindly confirm so in writing".

[wunder]

Have got some sound legal advice and the illegality of the assignment of the debt may not be a good enough defence as HFO will argue that they were not debt collecting at the time the debt was assigned to them and now they have the CCL they are. I was advised that the enforceability of the agreement may be the best route however how I came about the form initially and also which terms and conditions were not present at the time that they are enforcing now would be the key issue. In all of this costs are the issues raised and apparently HFO have been slapped up with a costs order of £40,000 yesterday for such a case. But costs are an issue and need to be taken into account as it can go either way.

 

i was also told that the judge was correct as I cannot hijack a hearing with defences that were not submitted or amended initially. However it may be an option to file an amended defence with consent from TR to reduce costs. Still having the documentation looked at as I type.

[broken arrow]

Have got some sound legal advice and the illegality of the assignment of the debt may not be a good enough defence as HFO will argue that they were not debt collecting at the time the debt was assigned to them and now they have the CCL they are. I was advised that the enforceability of the agreement may be the best route however how I came about the form initially and also which terms and conditions were not present at the time that they are enforcing now would be the key issue. In all of this costs are the issues raised and apparently HFO have been slapped up with a costs order of £40,000 yesterday for such a case. But costs are an issue and need to be taken into account as it can go either way.

 

i was also told that the judge was correct as I cannot hijack a hearing with defences that were not submitted or amended initially. However it may be an option to file an amended defence with consent from TR to reduce costs. Still having the documentation looked at as I type.

 

Who said HFO were not debt collecting at the time, HFO, I was getting letters in January and February 2008, trying to collect.

[wunder]

Apparently that is a criminal offence, to be doing so without a license and the civil courts would not address that ..... just what I was told this morning.

[DonkeyB]

BA, those letters could be very useful – still got them?

[patrickq1]

i will go through my stuff i think i still have some letters and also still have the card that a delivery company called when it was supposed to have delivered a package ,it was sent by hfo who had registered a fake delivery company at that time ,the fake delivery is also or was registered on the HFO accounts , so i will try to find the correspondance

patrickq1

[dadofholly]

wunder - have you been given a notice of assignment?

 

If so does it say on it that all future payments are to be made to HFO? If so that is debt collecting - as pointed out by a Judge.

[coledog]

i will go through my stuff i think i still have some letters and also still have the card that a delivery company called when it was supposed to have delivered a package ,it was sent by hfo who had registered a fake delivery company at that time ,the fake delivery is also or was registered on the HFO accounts , so i will try to find the correspondance

patrickq1

 

If you have one of those delivery cards - get it to the OFT pronto!!

[broken arrow]

BA, those letters could be very useful – still got them?

 

Yes I have every document.

[wunder]

wunder - have you been given a notice of assignment?

 

If so does it say on it that all future payments are to be made to HFO? If so that is debt collecting - as pointed out by a Judge.

 

Hi DOH, the NOA I have is from 2011, they never sent me anything till 2011.

[dadofholly]

Hi DOH, the NOA I have is from 2011, they never sent me anything till 2011.

 

Is that an NOA or a reminder NOA?

 

When date are they claiming interest from? as they can only claim interest from the date of notification.

[wunder]

Hi everyone,

 

I instructed solicitors in the matter based on a CFA. An amended defence should be filed first thing next week, as they have approached TR to consent so that costs are minimalised.

 

Downside, well I could be slammed with up to £1k costs for amending as I had reasonable time to do so after receiving the documents and that may have saved costs.

 

Apparently the DN is faulty, there is no termination of the account, agreement unenforceable, the illegal assignment, also the fact if you look at the T&Cs they sent page 4 of TRs bundle it states that paragraph one states particular info, which it doesn't, also the typo is different, also there are two interest rates in the terms whereas only one on the statements, and it is totally different, hence the authenticity if the tcs and the fact that they are not the ones at the time of the agreement are questioned.

 

Their WS stated the agreement was signed on 31st, it wasn't so the agreement itself is denied.

 

The fact that I was an employee at Barclays and it was a perk to get the card and the form was pre printed has been submitted as a defence too as tcs were not given at the time.

 

Also no NOA was served upon me and the address on the statements i have not lived at since 2000.

 

Downside is that if it goes to trial I have to pay counsel and this can be anything from 1k-3k.

[wunder]

Is that an NOA or a reminder NOA?

 

When date are they claiming interest from? as they can only claim interest from the date of notification.

 

Sorry DOH for the late reply, yes a reminder, I wasn't served with a NOA. The interest date they are claiming is also incorrect.

[coledog]

All the best Wunder

[wunder]

Thanks CD, just worried about amendment costs TR may claim then counsel fees. Forgot to mention that the limitation defence may fail on the balance of probabilities however the other defences are there.

[DonkeyB]

More false documents. What a surprise!

[wunder]

TR were ordered to pay 40k costs recently so maybe they will lick their wounds and think twice. The person dealing with my matter at TR is a trainee solicitor, was a paralegal before.

[coledog]

Think that they will be considering their possible costs very seriously!

[DonkeyB]

Trainee solicitor? Probably Mr stripy suit Bolton.

[wunder]

Trainee solicitor? Probably Mr stripy suit Bolton.

 

Correct!

[coledog]

Nothing wrong with stripy suits - on the right bloke

[dadofholly]

Sorry DOH for the late reply, yes a reminder, I wasn't served with a NOA. The interest date they are claiming is also incorrect.

 

They will obviously be able to provide a copy of the original NOA then won't they? They must have it as they sent you a reminer of it.

[wunder]

A quick update, TR have backed off and agreed to discontinue proceedings, this has been agreed via an order. However I have had to pay legal fees for the work done so far of just under £600, well at least they I'm well rid of them, many thanks for everyones support and advice, much appreciated

[DonkeyB]

Hopefully it’s a price worth paying. When you deal with people like this, you really have to nail their deliberately misleading practices and strike at the heart of their fibs. Well done.

[coledog]

Yes - well done Wunder:-)