Yes Car Credit PPI REclaim *** Resolved***

[steampowered]

Let me double check properly and get back to you.

[AndyOrch]

So on the N1 form I don't actually have to include the interest in the 'amount claimed' box? Just the amount for the PPI and the court fee? As long as I state that I'm claiming interest at 8% that can be worked out later. Is that right? If I don't include the interest it brings my court fee down to £120 rather than £245.

 

Ah, just realised that in writing that section, you have to state the date that the money became owed to you. Would that be the start date of the agreement? And finally (sorry) I definitely don't include the AMOUNT of interest that I'm claiming in the amount claimed box on the N1 form?

 

Correct..... no you don't.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[ukdarrenfan]

Thank you. I've just been looking at how to work out the interest and I have done it correctly at 70p per day. It was just the start date that I was confused about. However, on looking at the spreadsheet the amount of days elapsed are different. I've just gone onto a website that shows the number of days that have elapsed since 13/05/02 (which was when the first payment was taken) and including today it says that it is 4097. Working that out at 70p per day comes to £2867.90 and not £2326.04 as shown on my spreadsheet.

 

I worked out the daily interest by taking the amount owing of £3199.52 x 8% then dividing that by 365 giving me 70p daily rate. The days differ wildly from my spreadsheet though and the interest is much less?

[ukdarrenfan]

I've just checked here http://hmctscourtfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex050-eng.pdf and it says that the fee payable is for the amount being claimed INCLUDING interest so it will cost me £245 unfortunately. Should I just go by the calculations of 70p per day from the start of the agreement then and not the spreadsheet as the number of days don't match.

[AndyOrch]

I would claim net of interest but make sure its clearly worded within the P.O.C ....interest requested under sec69 at 8% is at the discretion of the court and allowed within the judgment. Of course if you are claiming contractual or compound interest then that must be worked out and shown within the claim figure...therefore you would have to pay the higher fee.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[ukdarrenfan]

So with ppi claims, do you claim for the whole period of the agreement up to now? That would make my higher figure the right one based on the number of days from the start of the agreement.

[AndyOrch]

You claim from the inception...to the date of judgment.......they will argue its against statute of limitation (6 years) but dont they always:wink:

[ukdarrenfan]

That's the first thing I'm expecting them to do! So I will take my calculations then as being 70p per day from day 1 then! All the worse for them!

[ukdarrenfan]

Well I've had a few delays in sorting everything out but I think I'm ready now. Have 3 copies of N1 form, particulars of claim and the agreement ready to go. Have I forgotten anything? Quoted the misrepresentation act and antecedent negotiations under Section 56. Nervous now its all about to begin. Hate them for forcing me into having to go this far.

[ukdarrenfan]

Decided to pre-empt their move to have it time barred and added in a paragraph about Section 32 (1) c of the Limitations Act 1980. Let's see what else they can throw in to defend themselves.

[ukdarrenfan]

I know that this website has long since closed down (anyone know the reason by the way?) but it makes very interesting reading on missold ppi and the deposit being taken from the insurances, etc. Well worth a read.

 

http://w11.zetaboards.com/saynotoyes/forum/17907/1/

 

Anybody know how to contact whistleblower now?

[dx100uk]

point to the thread please

 

never seen that site

 

dx

[ukdarrenfan]

Thought it might help anyone like me who is having problems with DAF. Answers a few questions about things I'm not sure on. It's the saynotoyes forum that is now closed. There is 10 whole pages on the Yes Car part of the site that make very interesting reading still.

[dx100uk]

you mention the deposit coming off the ins

 

which of those threads is it

I get several pages

 

post a link to it here

 

i'm gonna see if we can use that info there here for people to refer too.

 

dx

[ukdarrenfan]

http://w11.zetaboards.com/saynotoyes/topic/162569/1/

 

http://w11.zetaboards.com/saynotoyes/topic/162906/1/

[dx100uk]

thanks

 

dx

[ukdarrenfan]

Today received the Notice of Issue from the court. DAF have until 5th September to reply.

[ukdarrenfan]

Well

we received an acknowledgement of service this morning stating that DAFS intend to defend all the claim.

 

The letter is from Ascent Legal.

 

Now I know that they are part of Irwin Mitchell,

 

but apparently they specialise in debt recovery.

 

Any reason why they would use them in this case?

 

The loan was all paid in full and never defaulted.

[ukdarrenfan]

I've just found a connection. Niall Gilhooley, who is the CEO of Ascent apparently was the COO of Direct Auto Finance from 2005-2007.

[dx100uk]

Irwin Mitchell

 

blimey they still going

 

always were a bunch of nit wits.

 

nice find!

 

dx

[ukdarrenfan]

http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=21971699&authType=NAME_SEARCH&authToken=u64b&locale=en_US&srchid=2401139411377947256262&srchindex=1&srchtotal=1&trk=vsrp_people_res_name&trkInfo=VSRPsearchId%3A2401139411377947256262%2CVSRPtargetId%3A21971699%2CVSRPcmpt%3Aprimary&_mSplash=1

 

Irwin Mitchell, PDP and Ascent are all part of the same group.

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/director/8083484/niall-gilhooley

Edited August 31, 2013 by ukdarrenfan

[ukdarrenfan]

Obviously a lovely person.....

 

http://w11.zetaboards.com/saynotoyes/search/?c=1&q=Niall+gilhooley&type=post&sort=desc&forum%5B%5D=-1&s_m=5&s_d=13&s_y=2005&e_m=8&e_d=31&e_y=2013

[ukdarrenfan]

Today we received the defence from Ascent Legal. It's quite detailed. I've attached it here. Can anyone have a read through and let me know what you think?

 

Again, they are stating that it is time barred, that they were entitled to take the deposit from the insurance and that we knew about it, and that the insurances were optional.

 

They enclosed a printout of the booklet that we supposedly received from them regarding the insurances, that says they are optional, but they didn't enclose this in my SAR and don't remember seeing any of that.

 

They also say that any evidence I enclose regarding the Whistleblower programme or any other such online document regarding their conduct, that it is hearsay evidence and should be struck out. If it's going to be our word against theirs and be decided on the balance of probabilities how can I prove it if I can't rely on that?

 

Help!

[dx100uk]

well they certainly cannot use the statute barring get out on a ppi reclaim

that's for sure

 

the rest i'm not legally minded for

 

but have not read it right through.

 

dx

[ukdarrenfan]

Anyone who can advise a bit more?