Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Turnball Rutherford Solicitors have just delivered a Stat Demand for Statute Barred Debt** DISCONTINUED**


Hants38
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4436 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

  • Replies 450
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

As the account was only sold in 2007, someone MUST have the info, by law... call BC back and ask if they took over admin of ALL MS accounts, including the closed ones. If they say they did not, then by law MS are obliged to still hold the data.

 

Someone needs their cage rattling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I have phoned the directors office he has checked and has no matches at all under my name or postcode, the guy I spoke to was Gordon. He has one final system he needs to check but said it was unlikely to be on there, he will call me back in about 5 mins lets see if they find the details

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if they have it recorded as a Goldfish account? Did he say they do hold the old records? If you point out you are in litigation with HFO – who are under investigation by the OFT – he may be, er, inclined to dig deeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right the update, gordon from Barclays (Ihave to say very very helpful) managed to find the account had indeed been passed on to HFO Capital. He could not at this stage give ammounts, dates or when last payment had been made as in his own words the information is just not there.

 

He said he'll do some more digging and that I need to contact HFO Capital for the details. I said I wanted the original details from Barclays as HFO Capital have been known to fraudulently cunjour up documents. His reply was it is very unlikely and the only thing he may be able to provide is the original agreement, he cannot give me any statements nor can he give me dates as it is no longer on their system.

 

He did keep saying though that HFO Capital would be able to provide everything.

 

So what are your thoughts everyone, I guess we wait for the CPR from HFO.

 

As yet I have been unable to get hold of the sharp suited James Bolton but will keep trying

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought going on what Gordon from Barclays told me.

 

Is it possible that when Barclays sold on the debt the y literally sold eveything as in the information paperwork etc and that Barclays really do not have anything anymore?

 

If thats the case surely i'm stuffed???

Link to post
Share on other sites

"3.3 The Claimant company did not hold a Consumer Credit Licence with the Office of Fair Trading until 26th March 2008 as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to take part in licensable activities. Any activities carried out prior to this date such as debt collection would give rise to a criminal offence pursuant to s39 Consumer Credit Act 1974."

 

Just read this from another post about HFO Capital Limited, if this is true they clearly state taking on my account on the 31 January 2008 surely this has them hook line and sinker!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As DB has said, HFO will have got the basic info on this including last payment date, lets see if 'Gordon' can find anything else. Can you get him to put this findings in writing? It may mean you sending him an email requesting this and but you can ask if he will co-operate.

 

You have a number of grounds for defending this - including the 'dodgy' assignment, even if the SB status is uncertainly, but HFO would have to prove it is not SB. Can you be certain about when last payment was made as you do not necessarily have to have proof although this is useful.

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

As DB has said, HFO will have got the basic info on this including last payment date, lets see if 'Gordon' can find anything else. Can you get him to put this findings in writing? It may mean you sending him an email requesting this and but you can ask if he will co-operate.

 

You have a number of grounds for defending this - including the 'dodgy' assignment, even if the SB status is uncertainly, but HFO would have to prove it is not SB. Can you be certain about when last payment was made as you do not necessarily have to have proof although this is useful.

 

It is impossible for me to have paid them after January 2005 as I closed the account that my direct debit came from for this.

 

I'm confident that Gordon would put it into writing as he did not seem phased that HFO used dodgy practice and seemed unusually helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I have sent 8 emails all of which bounce back saying their email mailbox is full. I've been at work and it is very hard for me to stay on the phone on hold longer than 20-30 mins a go. Most of the time i have been getting engaged, or put in a queue and had to ring off after half an hour due to work.

 

I'll send a letter tomorrow recorded as at least if i do not get through i'll have some kind of defence. I'll keep trying tomorrow but they are only open 8:45-17:00

 

It's almost like they want you to not get hold of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely if Barclays are unable to provide the data, which under Data Protection requires them to hold your personal data for 6 years from last activity, then it must be SB.

 

Also if you check on your credit file then it would have disappeared as its over 6 years. Any entry if on experian would show last payment dates and they withdraw after 6 years.

 

Didnt read all the thread but legally it appears HFO dont have a leg to stand on and it should be thrown out Correct me cole and BA if im wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth in this case to state it is stat barred if

they have no records the the can't prove it's not,

stalemate, not worth pursuing???:madgrin:

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess I wait for Gordon to come back then?

 

What else do I need to do now, I'm still trying the court. I have emailed again but think this will bounce back. Shall I put my email into a letter and send next day delivery?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok good news after 45 mins I got through to the court.

 

Details as follows :

1. They have indeed sent out the details to the wrong address and have now updated their system

2. IT was issued on the 2nd June 2011

3. Total ammount including costs was £8424.71 (They have claimed 17.5% / annum since assigning the debt)

4. No particulars provided, a note said particulars were to come.

 

So where do I stand now still nothing from Barclays

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...