Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its a 12mts contract else why would it say till 2021 and first month..   simply states they don't charge a joining fee clever marketing ploy as people don't read things. it IS a monthly payment, that runs for 12mts.   but anyway there is stuff and all anyone can do to you.   dx        
    • Hi Slick,   Amazingly fast reply, thank you!   According to the reference on the payment it says "ON 24 SEP BCC" and the payment cleared 25th September at 11:26   I was simply told to sign up on the website by a staff member in the gym, no further information was given to me by them. The website stated that it's a rolling monthly membership that could be cancelled at any time "No contract membership JUST £14.99 a month, until 2021*" As far as I am aware there was absolutely no minimum membership length, unless there's some small print I've missed somewhere. But Harlands haven't mentioned anything about me being obliged to pay for a certain length of time so... I've attached a picture to this post of what I signed up for.   Also, I'm not sure if this has any relevance at all but the building is plastered with £9.99/month signs EVERYWHERE yet it costs £14.99 when you go on the website. False advertising 🙄 Could perhaps use that as leverage in a letter if it comes to it, I dunno? 😂
    • I look forward to hearing from a member of the team 
    • Hi Selrahc and welcome to CAG   Please be in no hurry to contact X4Less, Harlands or CRS - they can do nothing for now.   Before you do anything, we need more info. Please confirm :-   1. Approx date you joined.   2. Were you told it was a rolling monthly m/ship by a staff member, or a longer minimum contract.   You have no need to reply to any demand from Harlands/CRS so ignore them for now.
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

IND DCA goes straight to Court - old lloyds debt


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3141 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Keeping this brief and looking for some answers...

 

Debt placed in dispute 2005/6 dubious agreement ... Stalemate in how to resolve. .. Then debt was passed back to Lloyds who actually owned the debt ... New cards issues from Lloyds ... Not used... Exchange of letters with Lloyds ... Then silence ... Then assignment to a DCA I never heard of I sent them one letter when they threatened me with court... No reply they raised court claim with online MCOL ... I filed defence ...requesting all the NOA agreements etc etc my defence was that they had not proved the debt owed... That was last October and heard nothing since.

 

Now ... MCOL should have sent this to a court to be heard if a defence is filed according to their FAQ so this looks like a admin cockup but I would have expected the DCA to have progressed it but heard nothing for last four months so.... I could do nothing and let sleeping dogs lie or send a draft order to request the case be struck out... Anybody done anything similar ....

 

Also I was trying to sit tight and let six years expire.... Does the click start ticking again if a DCA lodges a claim ??

 

Thanks for any replies

 

Zubo

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have checked online as to whether a judgement has been made ?

 

When was the last payment or acknowledgement of the debt ? You mention it was in dispute in 2005/06, so was it statute barred at the time they made the claim ?

 

If they have a CCJ, they have 6 years from the date of judgement to collect the debt.

 

You would have to try to set aside the CCJ on the basis of a MCOL c*ck up. Normally they are not happy with set asides more than a few months after the judgement. You should have been sent a copy of the judgement.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you file your defence with MCOL, the case is on hold until the claimant responds.

 

When they are ready to proceed, and unfortunately the cliamant can abuse the court process and miss deadlines and it is accepted. You should then receive an Allocation Questionairre, informing you that the case has been transferred to your local court.

 

When you fill in the AQ, you submit with this your 'Draft Order Directions'.

 

If you have heard nothing since filing your defence, it is not a cock up, it just means the claimant has failed to apply to have the case progress to the next stage. If you are concerned about it just sitting there, you could apply to have the claim struck out because the claimant failed to provide proof that the claim was enforceable, and this is an abuse of the court process.

 

Debbie

Link to post
Share on other sites
No.

 

Only a payment acknowledges the debt and stops the clock ticking.

 

Not strictly true. ANY acknowledgement IN WRITING ( e.g. asking for time to pay,or asking for a full and final settlement) stops the clock ticky tocking. Beware though, DCAs have been known to "find" payments within the 6 years;however, they have to prove it, not you.

I am a lawyer, but I am an academic lawyer. I do not practice as a barrister or solicitor. You should consult a practising Solicitor BEFORE taking any Court or other action

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course yes. The person can't be coerced/threatened/bullied into acknowledgement, which many DCAs will try to do. It can be challenged then, of course yes. I wasn't trying to say otherwise

I am a lawyer, but I am an academic lawyer. I do not practice as a barrister or solicitor. You should consult a practising Solicitor BEFORE taking any Court or other action

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of a claim stops the clock ticking!

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All

 

Thank you very much for your posts.

 

The DCA is IND and I have just checked MCOL and there has been absolutely no progress at all.

 

So claim was issued 16/9/11, I acknowledged receipt and filed defence 17/10/11 as follows:

 

Defence

 

1. The claimant has not shown true title to this debt and the

claim has no merit and is vexatious. The defendant requests that

the court strikes out the claim.

2. The claimant states in his Particulars of Claim that he

complied with Section III and IV and annex B of the PD Pre-Action

Conduct. The claimant has not done so: the claimant sent a letter

dated 2nd September 2011 to which the defendant responded on the

5th September requesting the information detailed further below in

the defence. The claimant did not respond and instead issued this

claim in disregard of pre-Action protocol.

3. In the event that this claim is not dismissed, the defendant

disputes the claim in it's entirety and puts the claimant to

strict proof of the claim by providing the details which have been

requested from the original creditor over the course of the last

four years as follows.

4. In accordance with the Data Protection Act full details of the

account held by the original creditor EasyMoney including

statements containing all transactions on the account.

5. In accordance with the Consumer Credit Act and as requested the

true copy of the regulated agreement in full compliance of the Act

including all the prescribed terms and the terms and conditions of

the agreement as stipulated at the outset of the agreement and in

full compliance of the Act.

6. The claimant is put to strict proof of issue of any Default

Notice and full details of that Default Notice.

7. The claimant is put to strict proof of the Deed of Transfer

from the Original Creditor, EasyMoney to LloydsTSB.

8. The claimant is put to strict proof of the notification to the

claimant of the assignment of the debt from EasyMoney to LloydsTSB

and full compliance with the Law of Property Act S136

9. The claimant is put to strict proof of the Deed of Transfer

from LloydsTSB to the claimant Ind.

10. The claimant is put to strict proof of the notification to the

claimant of the assignment of the debt from LloydsTSB to the

claimant Ind and full compliance with the Law of Property Act S136

11. The defendant being a litigant in person, if this claim is not

dismissed, that the claim be transferred to the zubo County

Court.

 

so now... I am sorely tempted to do absolutely nothing... on the other hand I could issue a Draft Order requesting that the claim be struck ou since the claimant has done nothing for six months and has not contacted me.... BUT ... MCOL would then need to allocate it to my court and prompt IND that they need to do something.

 

So I am now in a Mexican standoff ... IND probably thought that I would roll over and never expected my defence and now ... simply do not know what to do....

 

thoughts???

 

thanks

 

Z

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

IND are good at starting claims but seem reluctant to progress them - I WONDER WHY??

PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it costs money and they haven’t got the documents they need to mount a case!

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you find out when the last acknowledgement was made, and hence when it becomes statute barred?

 

if you are close to being SB, it may be best to let it be for the time being, and when the debt is SB, then apply for a strike out. that way, if they or anyone else is prompted to chasing you, its already to late.

Link to post
Share on other sites
can you find out when the last acknowledgement was made, and hence when it becomes statute barred?

 

if you are close to being SB, it may be best to let it be for the time being, and when the debt is SB, then apply for a strike out. that way, if they or anyone else is prompted to chasing you, its already to late.

 

What? Er, no. That is plain wrong. A claim has been issued. That stops the SB clock. Be careful what you post!

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes donkey, I became confused as I was reading 2 boards at once. Not all women can multi task to perfection. my apologies, just going to edit the other forum...

Link to post
Share on other sites
:oops:

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, what I meant to say, was that my understanding, based on talks with a solicitor was that the court application stopped the clock for THAT applicant, but not for later, potential applications. So, although the clock has stopped for this creditor, and stays stopped as long as their claim is before the court, if they withdraw that claim or its struck out, any further claim from them is subject to the original timetable for being statue barred. Also, if the creditor should sell the debt, the buyer is also subject to the original timetable.

 

Now, that was explained by a solcitor, but we know how clever some of them are, so some/all of it may not be quite true.

 

If you think about it though, if it wasn't at least partly true, all any creditor would need to do to prevent a debt becoming statute barred, would be to start a claim every 6 years, and it wouldn't matter if the claim was struck out as long as it wasn't successfully defended. They needn't pursue it, as the clock is stopped as long as it is before the court.

 

It would seem obvious that there should be some mechanism to prevent debts being kept live by repeated court applications designed/timed simply to prevent the application of the Limitations Act. Yes, we all know such actions might be construed abuse of process, but extending a debt liability period even for another 6 years would have a big impact - liable for 12 rather than 6 years.

 

As I said, I don't know how much of what I said is true, but that was my meaning in my original post - the clock still ticked for any future purchaser of this debt and maybe even for the current owner if they are struck out and try again.

 

Maybe donkey is smarter than the solicitor I spoke to? (it wouldn't be hard though would it, looking at some of them)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solicitors are much smarter than me, but they have to make money. There is case law to prevent the issuing of claims to counter imminent SB status.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They would have to assign it back, and yes they can.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solicitors are much smarter than me, but they have to make money. There is case law to prevent the issuing of claims to counter imminent SB status.

 

could you possible cite any examples of this if you have some please?

This space intentionally left blank

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...