Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening, so not a good weekend reviewing paperwork -- I have lost some proofs of postage.. also, although not provided at CCA, they have now supplied a DN in their WS, please see scan of claimants WS (without statements) Document with tick boxes as signatures doesn't look like an agreement and is split across pages. Documents have been stapled and copied multiple times looking at the top left of them. Aside from that, having read other threads, I suspect they have everything? appreciate your input please Sorry for heavy redactions, I noticed the paperwork was see-through LinkHalifaxCC1.compressed.pdf
    • Received a final demand today Final demand.pdf
    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        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 wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants 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.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are 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 its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
    • Only trying to help.  Ain't being nasty.  Some
    • Hi folks, I've just found previous documentation. I thought it had gone missing. I'd forgotten that I did appeal it through POPLA but I can't find the thread on here that, I assume, I posted for help. Appeal letter is dated 27/10/2020 with a rejection. I genuinely had forgotten about this so apologies for misleading you. A lot has happened in the years since the ticket was issued. We closed down a couple of businesses and moved to the opposite end of the country to retire. The documents I have are scanned copies. I no longer have the originals. The NTK is also in there. If there's anything you'd like to see, please let me know and I'll post them, although it probably won't be until tomorrow now, but I'll be looking in on this page tonight. Thank you for the responses so far
  • 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

Help required! Disputed council tax debt been passed to Bailiffs...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4480 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

Hi all,

 

Possibly a bit of a strange one, I recently collected some post from a property I had recently vacated to find a removal notice dated 5th Dec. From a couple of phone calls to the bailiffs and Hounslow council I managed to ascertain that the debt is for £786.04 and is for council tax owed for the period Apr - Nov 2005. A liability order was issued in court on 28th June 2006.

 

Now this is absolutely the first contact that anyone has made about this debt including Hounslow Council themselves, so it seems strange that I am being pursued for it over six years later. I was initially going to go down the statue barred route with the debt being older than six years but wasn't certain as to whether that was still possible after a liability order had been given and it was being handled by debt collectors.

 

Other information: The council have six names on their bill liable for the amount but I seem to be the only one to be contacted at the moment. (am in contact with all the others)

 

Contracts were never properly renewed at the property and I need to check but I'm pretty sure that I moved out before the bill date but does that even matter once the bailiffs have their grubby dishonest little mitts on it?

 

The Bailiffs are Newlyn, I have contacted the office and also the bailiff on my case. He isn't on the certificated register but would need to check name spelling before I'm sure. They have a phone number for me but not my current address.

 

Any help would be massively appreciated!

 

Peace!

 

L.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ctax cant be sb'ed however the further down the road it goes the less of a priority it actually is.

 

though the LO and any enforcemnent attached to it might well be suspect now.

 

i'd not be contacting nor paying any bailiffs, deal/pay the council only

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem here isn't the bailiffs, but if you actually are liable for the outstanding amount.

With a liability order, the outstanding amount will not become statute barred.

 

Acertain the actual dates that the liability order is for and when you were in occupation. If you cannot show that you had left the property before the disputed bill, then you are liable either jointly or severally.

 

So get searching and if you can get the proof you need, then contact the council, not the bailiff, this isn't like a loan debt that gets sold on, it will always remain with the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys... So the onus would be on me to prove that I had moved out, they wouldn't have to provide proof ie. a valid contract that I was living there to get the liability order? And am I right in thinking that even though the council have six names on the bill, I am singularly liable for the full amount in the eyes of the bailiffs? And would you have any ideas how I could go about finding out if the liability order was suspect?

 

Thanks again!

 

L.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would need to contact the revenues and benefits department and request all details on the debt.

If you can prove that you were not living there at the time the debt accrued, then the debt will be taken back from the bailiffs and that should be the end of it.

 

Were there 6 of you living there at the same time?

 

The council will always chase the first person on the CT bill regardless of how many were living there at the time, however, if this property was classed as a multiple let, then it is usually down to the LL to pay the council tax which should be counted in your rent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All six of us were living there at the same time. It was always our responsibility to sort out and pay council tax separate to the rent while we were there... Is there any other advice anyone has? It's going to be pretty tricky to prove that we weren't there, although I would have thought it would have been equally as tricky to prove we were there with the contracts we had not being renewed properly every year.

 

Also it seems strange that they can just take us to court and issue a liability order without first trying to contact us?! And then leaving it another six years before the bailiffs chasing in the debt.

 

Sorry for the questions but does anyone know if a liability order issued in court can affect credit ratings?

 

Thanks again.

 

L.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The council needs a lawful document that says you are liable for the tax as they have no collection powers without it. With the order, they can legally collect the tax from you using various means which includes bailiffs and deductions direct from you salary/wages or benefits.

 

If you are not sure of anything, or even if you are doubtfull that you even owe the tax, then you can send a subject access request (along with £10) to the council and you will get a copy of everything they have on you including letters sent to you etc.

This will then give you the dates that you will have to check out. Can you contact the landlord, even if it was an ad-hoc affair, he should still know the dates you were in residence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to speak to someone at the Council and ask the following questions:

1 - how many Liability Orders they have against you

2 - the dates they were obtained

3 - the addresses they were for

4 - the period of time each covers

5 - how much each one was for

6 - how much is still outstanding

7 - the dates they were passed on for enforcement

 

In some repects things are loaded against you as it is permissible for the Council to claim they wrote to you at the last address they had for you. Did you tell them you moved? Did any of the others tell them they moved? Did the LL ever inform the Council when tenants moved in or out? Have the Council contacted any of the others or are they taking the easy option in making you pay it all?

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So they would have had to present this document to obtain the liability order? Do you know if it's possible to challenge this?

 

 

No the council don't work that way. They just present a spreadsheet to the judge saying Mr x owes £x and the judge says ok, (unless the person turns up in court and can show they don't owe it), and stamps it. The council then hands over the £3 it gets charged and adds about £60 to your outstanding bill calling them court fees.

 

Councils like people going into arrears with their council tax as it makes them a lot of extra money. A spreadsheet can easily contain up to 500 names and at a cost of £3 for each name, that is £1,500. They then add around £60, (some up to £150) per name so 60x500 is £30,000, a nice little earner.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

and no it does not show on cra files

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the info, it's all beginning to make a little bit more sense now... If it does turn out I was a tenant at the time of the bill would anyone be able to recommend a best course of action? This would obviously mean that no correspondence would have been received about this debt at the address although it would be our word against theirs.

 

Just wondering if there is an end in sight managing to avoid years of bailiffs deciding to give it another go at getting their money. Kudos to those who do it but it's a lot of time invested and I currently live with girlfriend and flatmate so there are others to consider also...

 

Ploddertom - Thanks for that, will get that info. The Landlord never informed the council who moved in and out it was always left up to us to do that and sort out bills/CT accordingly. I would have told when I moved I'm just not sure when that was right now. And yes, the council have six names on the bill but I am the only one being contacted by the Bailiffs right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...