Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am helping my niece on an overdraft debit originally with the Bank of Scotland that was bought by Intrum.  I would appreciate any help and advice. . . here is the story so far: The bank account was in my niece’s name that had an overdraft facility. My niece and her partner, at that time, run into some financial hardship caused her to default in account, March 2017. They agreed with bank to settle the outstanding some but removing the excessive charges. My niece’s partner claimed that he paid the agreed sum and the couple never heard any more from the bank on the issue until started to their claim. Unfortunately all the records of the settlement is with my noises x-partner. So we have not much to go on other than retrieve all the bank records on the account. Intrum bought the debit on 28/11/2018. Intrum filed to recover the debit with the Simple Procedure court in Glasgow in April 2020. I have send SAR letter to the Bank of Scotland but had no response from them yet, perhaps because of the current Pandemic situation. The court directed me to call the original loan holder to the Case Management discussion, by filling in some legal form, to answer to present their legitimacy of the debit.  I would be grateful if anyone could have help with your views on the best way to proceed.
    • How do I know what to reply though and how to get it right.  I may have had 12 months to sort it but I simply have not been able to afford to keep it up. In December I had high hopes but circumstances completely out of my control at that time meant rightly or wrongly my bank account was not on my mind. Bear in mind I have taken out 2000 and paid back 4700 or thereabouts. So it certainly isn’t the case that I never ever paid them or tried to run away.  I have made substantial payments throughout these couple of years. 
    • get some CCA request s running tomorrow. without enforceable paperwork no-one is going near a courtroom door. wait and see what toilet paper each one returns with. they have 12+2 days else one of your options is too cease payment until they do.    
    • Hi  I wonder if anyone can assist. We purchased a proform treadmill from Sweatband.com approximately 3 months ago. It is a fairly large treadmill and we purchased with the intention of putting into our garage which has electrical wiring and my partner has a turbo trainer already in there (has been for years). Only when the treadmill got delivered did it the warranty documents advise against keeping it in the garage. No where on the website for Sweatband or the manufacturer's website does it recommend the treadmill is not kept in the garage. The sweatband website has a treadmill buyer's guide where it actually comments that people like to put treadmills in the garage but consider the head height. So it is only after you have purchased and taken delivery of the treadmill are you advised not to keep it in the garage.    We took delivery and set it up on a proper gym mat. We make sure to turn it off when not in use and to cover the treadmill when not in use. It has been working fine. I used on Friday night and then on Saturday morning when I went to switch on the electrics have stopped.    Sweatband are now redirecting us to the manufacturer who are saying we have the item in an unsuitable environment and this will void our warranty.  The item is so big we cannot physically lift it out of the garage and we do not have a room in the house big enough to store it.    Has anyone had any similar problems with treadmills in the garage and it affecting the warranty? We feel we have been mis-sold a product as it is only after you have taken delivery are you told you cannot store in the garage despite the seller's guide making reference to where to store your treadmill and making reference to the garage but failing to warn it is against advice to store it there. We would have never bought the treadmill if we knew it was unsuitable for the garage.    Also we made the transaction via paypal but using our credit card. Do we have any protection with our credit card or paypal? The cost was £1,500 so we do feel it should last longer than 3 months.   Any help or advice would be much appreciated.   Thanks  EM0149 
    • they weren't enforcement officer, they were a powerless DCA.   the point of only getting 2 days to raise £1500 (not £1800 the £300 repo fee is an unlawful penalty) is one we shall use. BUT!!!....... you can't call the kettle back , you've had more then 12mts to sort this out, you haven't, so the other points are pretty much irrelevant, it works both ways .   your reply has got to be very very carefully worded in most certainly wont be tonight nor tomorrow you should answer poss by friday, you rush back with a poor reply you play right into their games. don't!!  
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

MKDP/barclaycard claimform - will need some help please!


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2190 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

  • Replies 159
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Be strange for an account to be sold before a default notice was issued though so chances are ..

 

 

M1

 

Well they can sell the account at any time, without a DN, but the new owner would be in a bit of a spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw another puzzle into the mix, my CRA file has never had a Default registered by BC, but MKDP registered one in December 2011 - despite the fact I've never received a DN from MKDP.

 

Got to be worth pursuing a correction if we "win"?

 

BL

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to throw another puzzle into the mix, my CRA file has never had a Default registered by BC, but MKDP registered one in December 2011 - despite the fact I've never received a DN from MKDP.

 

Got to be worth pursuing a correction if we "win"?

 

BL

 

If you were defaulted by Barclays, they cannot post another DN post assignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Hi Dotty,

 

If Barclays issued you with a DN, which I presume that they did, the new owner cannot Default you again. They can only update that notice.

 

When they purchase a debt, they take on the liabilities and responsabilities of the OC, in an absolute assignment.

 

Where are you with that one Dotty?

Link to post
Share on other sites
My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Have you heard back from the court as to the stayed status?

 

If not, it may be worth a call to Northanmpton.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dotty,

 

A point for your DN defence

 

The Default notice is a bad notice. I refer the Court to the recent

ruling of HHJ Chambers QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court in Keith Harrison vs Link Financial Limited EWHC 2011 B3 where at paragraph 75 when addressing a default notice he stated………

 

The notice of enforcement

 

75. The notice of enforcement was a statutory pre-condition of enforcement. It was a bad notice and enforcement CANNOT be attempted in dependence upon it. ……………………….

 

Accordingly the Claimant cannot enforce the agreement due to the fact the notice is indeed bad for the reasons stated above.

 

It is also noted that the provisions of s78, s87 & s88, are for application to live accounts only. Having terminated the agreement, the Claimant is no longer in a position to rectify these defects in the statutory documents issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My laptop just packed up as I was halfway through posting! I'm doing this from my phone which isn't ideal and I don't know how it will work.

 

Thanks for that info Vint, I was putting the link to the case you referred to but I don't know how to from my phone!

I've heard nothlng from MK or the court so I'm guessing it's stayed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Exactly!

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello guys laptop now in for repair so now limited but hopefully not for too long!

 

As soon as I'm up and running again I'll be resuming a BC thread for my OH as we had another N1 yesterday from MK!

 

I'm posting this from my phone and I find it very slow and not user friendly!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dotty,

 

A point for your DN defence

 

The Default notice is a bad notice. I refer the Court to the recent

ruling of HHJ Chambers QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court in Keith Harrison vs Link Financial Limited EWHC 2011 B3 where at paragraph 75 when addressing a default notice he stated………

 

The notice of enforcement

 

75. The notice of enforcement was a statutory pre-condition of enforcement. It was a bad notice and enforcement CANNOT be attempted in dependence upon it. ……………………….

 

Accordingly the Claimant cannot enforce the agreement due to the fact the notice is indeed bad for the reasons stated above.

 

It is also noted that the provisions of s78, s87 & s88, are for application to live accounts only. Having terminated the agreement, the Claimant is no longer in a position to rectify these defects in the statutory documents issued.

 

Is this in relation to your MK/BC claim Dotty? Just wondering if you're preparing a defence in preparation of a court hearing?

 

BL

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is his story similar to ours Dotty?

 

At least you'll know what to expect from these muppets!!

 

BL :)

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this in relation to your MK/BC claim Dotty? Just wondering if you're preparing a defence in preparation of a court hearing?

 

BL

 

Hi BL, now got laptop sorted, the post that Vint added referred to another case, not mine.

 

Hi happyhippy and noshovel, welcome to my thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you got the tech sorted out Dotty :)

 

Are you bothering to do anything with MK, or just going to leave it? I'm half tempted to forget about it, but at the same time, I'd like to haul them in front of a judge to show how they've abused the court process in attempting to sneak a case through the bulk claims centre when they've not got a sniff of a case....but I don't know if I can be ars*d!!

 

BL

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BL I agree, they need to be taken to task and stopped, but I really wouldn't know where to start and really have to many other things to cope with at the moment!

 

Have you spoken to anyone at Northampton?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi BL I agree, they need to be taken to task and stopped, but I really wouldn't know where to start and really have to many other things to cope with at the moment!

 

Have you spoken to anyone at Northampton?

 

I have now!!So - in the words of the guy at Northampton CC, the claim is now "blocked". As its been over 33 days and MK haven't responded to my defence, they've efectively closed the file. If MK want to re-open the case, they'll have to make an application and explain to a DJ why they didn't respond to my defence within the required timescales. Worth a call Dotty, but I expect yours will be the same story - happy days!do we put our files back into storage, or go for the jugular (but risk re-opening the can of worms?)BL

Well 6 years on and most of the defaults have disappeared, thank you CAG for a

ll your help

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have now!!So - in the words of the guy at Northampton CC, the claim is now "blocked". As its been over 33 days and MK haven't responded to my defence, they've efectively closed the file. If MK want to re-open the case, they'll have to make an application and explain to a DJ why they didn't respond to my defence within the required timescales. Worth a call Dotty, but I expect yours will be the same story - happy days!do we put our files back into storage, or go for the jugular (but risk re-opening the can of worms?)BL

 

Thanks for letting us know BL, I will get round to giving them a call when I can.

 

Once I know, I wouldn't take it any further.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi, go for it

 

Sorry for not responding sooner, I've been away on holiday.

 

No nothing heard since and I guess none of the others in similar situations have heard anything more either as I have not had any notifications from their threads!

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...