Recieved SD from Hamptons, Lowell portfolio l LTD

[42man]

You will find this thread useful, but what you have to be prepared to show a judge how angry and upset you are at having to deal with this....you must try and read through this and understand what is being said - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?355482-SD-from-Lowells-via-Hampton-Legal-for-CAP1-card-debt-HELP!!&highlight=lowells

 

You should also get some inspiration from this thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?334524-Lowell-portfolio-served-me-SD-HELP!!!-***-WON-FULL-COSTS-***&highlight=lowells

 

And this one too - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?349081-Lowells-Hamptons-SD-***-WON-WITH-COSTS-***&highlight=lowells

[42man]

This thread will help you too as to the forms you will need - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?354305-Statutory-Demand&highlight=aside

 

If you need help then please shout....you have 18 days from when the demand came in to your hands to set aside

[will lliw]

Here's the two letters I recieved today, posting following reading your links above thanks!!

 

Abuse the insolvency service! They are giving me a further 14 days to pay the reduced amount ontop of the SD time limits! That could be interesting if they petition before then??

 

POST SD 2.pdf

POST SD 1.pdf

[42man]

You may have to submit an 'out of time' demand (and even then they may reject it)...I have just seen the date of the demand. It is easier to set aside the demand than it is the petition. You really should have made the effort to set aside earlier....

[will lliw]

I know I made a big mistake ignoring this so long, Its woken me up I can tell you. I hope at the very least that this thread serves as a warning to others that they must apply to set aside any Hamptons legal SD before the dust settles below the post box!

Edited July 6, 2012 by will lliw
removing stupid questions

[will lliw]

Ok.

 

ive caught up with you a bit 42man, I see what your saying about the out of time demand, by that do you mean a CPR to Hamptons and if I do that they are just going to petition for bankrupcy correct? cue palpitations!!

[vint1954]

Have you sent your forms in yet to have this set aside?

[will lliw]

NO!!

 

I have been a fool and failed to take note of the opinions here, have just recoverd from a serious case of head in sand syndrome despite 42mans warnings weeks ago!

 

I dispute the Debts untill I have oppurtunity to view the original agreements etc and I am as mad as hell that Lowells are abusing the insolvency regs like this, I honestly cant believe a petition for bankrupcy can be made before a CCJ is obtained!

 

Today I have prepared SAR's for the OC's and a CCA for Lowells and they will be sent tomorow by recorded delivery. I am a bit worried about sending Lowell's a SAR directly and not even sure its worth it as the SD time limit has expired. All I know about bankrupcy is what I have learned today and i suspect my only salvation may lie in a notice of opposition but lets not jump to far ahead yet. Over the weekend I hope to complete 6.4 and 6.5 ready for monday morning, hopefully I can pull this back around, hopefully and if not kiss goodby to my redundancy pay because im not losing my house over this although JSA will not pay my mortgage and work as we all know is like rocking horse s#&t!........... Signing on next week aswell

 

I intend to attempt to present my set aside application to the court in person on Monday morning but I am sruggling to put in words why I have delayed doing this since I have had the SD for weeks but not entirely sure when it was served as explained at the start of thread. The last few weeks have been pretty stressfull tbh but the help here really takes the age of the stress!

Edited July 6, 2012 by will lliw

[will lliw]

The following link is what i need, good stuff! If post 18 is true, is Hamptons really Lowells?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?149346-Statutory-Demand-Set-Aside-Form-6.4

[vint1954]

The most important thing is to to get your 6.4 & 6.5 forms into the court.

 

Explain that the SD was delivered in a brown envelope with a hand written name on it. Also let them know in no uncertain terms that the date on the SD was 3 weeks previous to delivery and that you had no time to rectify it. Also explain that you only realised that it was genuine, when you received your letters today.

 

I would write to Lowells explaining that their SD service was very suspect and that you are applying to the court to have it set aside. Also let them know that you will be complaining about their actions to the OFT, objecting to their underhand tactics and that you are going to dispute their fitness to hold a credit licence. Also advise them in this letter that you dispute these debts. Send this letter first class registered post tomorrow. Also let them know that you are sending an SAR to the OC.

 

You can also put a CCA request in the same envelope to lowells.

 

An SD can be issued for undisputed debts, but you only had to dispute it weeks ago and you would not be in this possition.

 

Then send your SAR to the OC.

[vint1954]

The following link is what i need, good stuff! If post 18 is true, is Hamptons really Lowells?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?149346-Statutory-Demand-Set-Aside-Form-6.4

 

Indeed that is correct, however you need to get on the case with the set aside.

[vint1954]

Will,

 

The other point is that have you received a notice of assignment for these debts. That will be a letter from Lowells and the creditor advising you that the have purchased your debt. If not, request these notices in your letter to Lowells. You need to know that they are able to collect and make them prove it.

 

This is from another thread.

 

16. ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS

here any rights of a creditor under a consumer credit agreement (for example the right to be repaid the money) are sold or transferred to a third party, notice of that assignment must be given to the borrower as soon as reasonably possible, except in the circumstances described below. This requirement applies to all regulated consumer credit agreements other than agreements secured on land. This requirement is in new section 82A of the CCA43.

 

It is the responsibility of the assignee (the creditor acquiring the rights) to ensure that notice is given. However, he does not have to give notice himself, but can agree with the assignor (the creditor assigning the rights) that the assignor will give notice instead, depending on what is more sensible in the circumstances. It is important, however, that notice is given as soon as reasonably possible and in a way that is clearly understandable by the borrower.

 

Notice does not have to be given where arrangements for servicing the credit are unchanged as far as the borrower is concerned. For example, if Creditor A sells his rights under a credit agreement to Creditor B but Creditor A still collects the borrower’s repayments in the same way and is the only point of contact for the borrower on matters regarding the agreement, notice does not have to be given.

 

here notice has not been given, and arrangements for servicing the credit do subsequently change, the borrower must be informed of the assignment on or before the date that change happens. Again, this must be readily comprehensible to the borrower.

 

The definition of “creditor” in section 189 of the CCA 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.

[will lliw]

Thankyou Vint, I badly needed your posts so so much today and I thank you and everybody here for your patience and understanding. I am going to make a donation to cag tonight as soon as I get these letters written, I think you guys n gals deserve it!

[vint1954]

Thankyou Vint, I badly needed your posts so so much today and I thank you and everybody here for your patience and understanding. I am going to make a donation to cag tonight as soon as I get these letters written, I think you guys n gals deserve it!

 

I would save your cash until you have some to spare. Advice here is freely given.

[will lliw]

deleted for sanity

Edited July 7, 2012 by will lliw
bad post

[will lliw]

I would save your cash until you have some to spare. Advice here is freely given.

 

just the thought of spare cash makes me . I appreciate all the great free opinions and even the not so great free opinions some folk have!

 

I will donate at some point as I want to help with the costs of running this place and would hate to see banners everywhere!

[will lliw]

Good morning Vint, 42man and everybody else ofcourse!! This morning following a dodgy nights sleep I finished my letter of dispute to Hamptons plus the additional CCA and will go post it shortly by recorded along with SARs for the OC's, wouldnt mind a wise eye to look over the hamptons letter first though if thats ok or maybe nessacery as wouldnt want to make a silly error at this stage?

 

And I would like to say agian thanks for your patience, I know ive been silly not dealing with this sooner, never again will I make that mistake.

[vint1954]

Hi Will,

 

just post your response up, minus your details.

 

Vint

[vint1954]

And don't forget your forms to have the SD set aside for monday morning.

 

These are the most important of all.

 

Vint

[will lliw]

Heres a second draft of my statement, still got some tidying up to do i think.

 

 

The defendent disputes the debt in full.

 

On the evening of 31/5/2012 I returned home to find a brown envelope had been posted through with no postage mark or address on it and just my name written in blue biro, I wrote the date upon the envelope in red biro for future reference.

I opened the envelope to find a letter with documents stapled to it claiming to be a statutory demand and all dated 8/5/2012, these documents were all dated some three weeks prior to being posted through my door and this left me confused as to the validity of these documents and left me no time to address the issues presented to me in the claim.

 

On the 6/7/2012 I recieved two more letters from Hamptons legal, one for each of the debts claimed in the statatury demand, warning me they intended to petition for bankrupcy within 14 days should I not agree to any of the terms provided to settle the debts that they allege to be liable for, it was at this time I realised the previous statatury demand may infact be genuine but it still left me in some confusion as to the date and service.

 

I immediatly wrote to Hamptons legal in order to inform them that;

 

A. I dispute the claims and I require all documents relating to the claims pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require Lowell to provide me with a true copy of the credit agreements relating to the alleged debts, together with any other documentation including the notice of asignments that the Act requires them to provide. In addition to this and in order to further determine the facts I have written subject access request letters under CPR 31.14 to the original creditors named in the Statutory demand.

 

B. I have also informed the claimant that the validaty of the Statutory demand is questionable due to the unknown date of service and that this has caused me great distress and anxiety, as a result I intend to to complain to the OFT about the conduct of the claimant as I believe they are employing under hand tactics and are clearly contradicting the debt collection guidance issued by the OFT that states Statutory Demands should not be used for debt collection purposes and due to both of these underhand tactics the claimant is not fit to hold a credit licence.

 

The defendant avers that the claimant is committing a gross abuse of process by not having made any attempt at any kind of personal service and simply posting the demand without a postmark or date. I refer to the authority of

 

Judge Boggis QC - RE AWAN - [2000] BPIR 241

 

'In my judgment, bankruptcy is one of the most serious forms of execution that can be brought against a debtor. In any bankruptcy proceedings it is, in my view, absolutely clear that the provisions as to service must be followed exactly.

In light of the frivolous nature of this demand the defendant gracefully requests the judge dismiss the demand and in light of the distress to myself and my family at having to deal with this the claimant request the judge grants costs in the defendants favour (in the indemnity or standard) I refer to -

 

I respectfully request that the court give consideration to awarding these costs on the indemnity basis or, in the alternative, on the standard basis as I believe, in any case, that they have been proportionately and reasonably incurred and/or are of a proportionate and reasonable amount.

 

In support of this request, I would also like to refer the court’s attention to the authority of the High Court in the case of:-

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection. the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

[dx100uk]

strange

offering discounts on debts they are so confident of they send an SD..........

 

your cra file will tell you the status of your debts

 

noddle is free see below.

 

get that SD set aside etc done though ASAP.

 

dx

[will lliw]

strange

offering discounts on debts they are so confident of they send an SD..........

 

your cra file will tell you the status of your debts

 

 

noddle is free see below.

 

get that SD set aside etc done though ASAP.

 

dx

 

Yes dx, it is odd and leads me to believe Hamptons are ethier bluffing, grossly incompetent (highly likely) or trying there luck and clearly using IL to debt collect against the OFT's guidlines.

 

Does my statement look good enough to put infrontt of a judge?

 

 

Thanks for noddle, just tried to register but failed as they couldnt verify my id, prob somthing to do with not been on the electoral register as I didnt sign it last time out of protest over the current polotical sate of affairs in this country. See what happens when you take a moral stand in this fine democratic country of ours!

Edited July 8, 2012 by will lliw

[will lliw]

Filling in the set aside application now, silly question but in part d is it lowells or hamptons that should be put down to be served?

 

And also realised my statement is crap and at best ill prob get an adjournment????? Really need some help with this if anybody has the time for me.

[will lliw]

umm, the more threads I read I start to wonder perhaps this might be statued barred after all and heres me still talking to myself, wish I wasnt so thick!!!

 

Ok, still thinking about my statement, reasons to have this set aside all assuming the court doesnt reject my application if that kind of thing goes on....

 

 

• Documents in particulars of claim not served with SD
  
• No attempt at personal service of SD
  
• No evidence for process server posting SD by hand
  
• IL being used by Hamptons yet again to debt collect in opposition to OFT guidelines.
  

Edited July 8, 2012 by will lliw

[will lliw]

Heres my final draft that will going to the court tomorow, can somebody please have a look over it please. ALso struggling to determine the date i was served for the 6.4.

 

 

 

 

 

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim. It is averred that the Claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment in accordance with section 136(1), of the Law of Property Act 1925, in respect of the alleged debt. The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, which is likely to include penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].

 

The defendant requires sight of the notice of assignment of the debt. In addition the defendant requires proof of service of the Notice of Assignment in accordance with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 which is required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action in their own name since it appears this is an assigned debt. the reason the defendant requests this information is inter alia to clarify the dates are correctly stated on all documents , the defendant notes that if there are errors in the assignment it may be rendered in effectual in law per W F Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke and another - [1956] 2 All ER 169

 

 

 

On the evening of 31/5/2012 I returned home to find a brown envelope had been posted through with no postage mark or address on it and just my name written in blue biro, I wrote the date upon the envelope in red biro for future reference.

I opened the envelope to find a letter with documents stapled to it claiming to be a statutory demand and all dated 8/5/2012, these documents were all dated some three weeks prior to being posted through my door and this left me confused as to the validity of these documents and left me no time to address the issues presented to me in the claim.

 

On the 6/7/2012 I recieved two more letters from Hamptons legal, one for each of the debts claimed in the statatury demand, warning me they intended to petition for bankrupcy within 14 days should I not agree to any of the terms provided to settle the debts that they allege to be liable for, it was at this time I realised the previous statatury demand may infact be genuine but it still left me in some confusion as to the date and service.

 

I immediatly wrote to Hamptons legal in order to inform them that;

 

A. I dispute the claims and I require all documents relating to the claims pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require Lowell to provide me with a true copy of the credit agreements relating to the alleged debts, together with any other documentation including the notice of asignments that the Act requires them to provide. In addition to this and in order to further determine the facts I have written subject access request letters under CPR 31.14 to the original creditors named in the Statutory demand.

 

B. I have also informed the claimant that the validaty of the Statutory demand is questionable due to the unknown date of service and that this has caused me great distress and anxiety, as a result I intend to to complain to the OFT about the conduct of the claimant as I believe they are employing under hand tactics and are clearly contradicting the debt collection guidance issued by the OFT that states Statutory Demands should not be used for debt collection purposes and due to both of these underhand tactics the claimant is not fit to hold a credit licence.

 

The defendant avers that the claimant is committing a gross abuse of process by not having made any attempt at any kind of personal service and simply posting the demand without a postmark or date or any evidence of service in the form of a statement to that affect from a proper licenced process server. I refer to the authority of

 

Judge Boggis QC - RE AWAN - [2000] BPIR 241

 

'In my judgment, bankruptcy is one of the most serious forms of execution that can be brought against a debtor. In any bankruptcy proceedings it is, in my view, absolutely clear that the provisions as to service must be followed exactly.

In light of the frivolous nature of this demand the defendant gracefully requests the judge dismiss the demand and in light of the distress to myself and my family at

having to deal with this the claimant request the judge grants costs in the defendants favour (in the indemnity or standard) I refer to -

I respectfully request that the court give consideration to awarding these costs on the indemnity basis or, in the alternative, on the standard basis as I believe, in any case, that they have been proportionately and reasonably incurred and/or are of a proportionate and reasonable amount.

 

 

In support of this request, I would also like to refer the court’s attention to the authority of the High Court in the case of:-

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection. the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).