Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • thanks ae - yes  I understand the claims are between me and the lender.  But with regards to the order for sale the judge specifically said it is the receiver who is appointed to sell - and he hasn't/ and isn't - which is why I am asking if I can apply to the court v the receiver for an order for sale right now?   The receiver is not part of the current proceedings heading to trial.  But he is responsible for selling the property - and he has consistently rejected offers over >5y.   This is specifically why I would like to understand if I can apply to the court to enforce the sale ??? As above - The judge has said otherwise the order for sale v the lender has to be dealt with via the trial.  Which they have deliberately delayed via the adjournment. Valuation is an issue. The lender chose the valuer.  I paid but his report basically belongs to and is referred to by the lender.  He did a prof valuation without doing a site visit.  He had done a site visit 5 months earlier for different potential lender.  The 1st valuation he erroneously did as fh.  He just did a re-write 5m later - but kept the same value for lh. I had a great offer on the table from a niche buyer which would have cleared the loan and given me a lot of £s.  But the lender rushed through the repo and the buyer got spooked and ran.  The lender then slashed the price by 30%+ from their valuation (fire sale price?).  As you suggest - they fully expected potential buyers to quickly grab the property at such a discount.  But it turned out they couldn't.  The market had dropped anyway. Then covid hit.  Every potential buyer was questioning the valuation.  The lender and receivers actions have eroded the equity.  This wouldn't make sense to any normal lender.  99.9% would have just sold to the 1st buyer willing to transact.  The lender/ receiver had such a willing buyer on day 1 of marketing.  But they spent 15months trying not to sell to them.  As I said, disclosure shows the ceo wanted (wants?) to keep it for himself - so common sense didn't (doesn't) prevail.   The lender has made a MoneyClaim v me.  I am disputing it because I maintain it is their actions that has caused the erosion of equity/ a debt to accrue. The lender's problem now is that they have spent so much money and added so much interest over 5y that they cannot sell the property for what they need/ want.  They are trying to blame me for this.  But it is their fault; not mine - because I am not in possession or in charge of selling it. As I also said above - if there is some legal reason why I cannot make an application to the court for an order for the receiver to sell - then can I ask the other entity which has a charging order and threatened to do so. ???    
    • We registered our child with a nursery last year for a June 2024 start date. This was before how the new 15 hours free childcare was going to work. At the time my wife paid a £50 deposit. A few weeks ago they sent out an email about how the new funding was going to work. The nurseries can use it as they wish and they said if the child wants to come for one full day we still have to pay £50 and we can't use all the hours for one day. They also drastically increased their day rate. As a result of this we were looking elsewhere and have found a much cheaper nursery so we are changing.  The original nursery now said you only get the deposit back if she starts because it comes out of the first month of fees. I don't think we filled any any form or anything so there were no terms and conditions. Are we entitled to get the deposit back or is it our fault for not asking what the terms were when we paid. 
    • Hi Baldilocks. Welcome to CAG. I've done some minor formatting edits to your post to make it easier to read for people on mobile. Try to keep to 1 or 2 sentences max before creating a line break in your post. It's the Consumer Rights Act 2015, not the Sale of Goods Act 2015. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 superseded The Sale Of Goods Act 1979 and the latter does not apply as I imagine this purchase was made after 1st October 2015. Can you confirm the make and model of the vehicle? Some vehicles have their service history stored within the on board computers now or have it available to view online at any point. How did you pay for the vehicle? Finance (what type), Debit/Credit Card etc? I would argue, that should the above points not be correct, you would be right to claim that the goods are not as described under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  
    • Thanks everyone for all your help, but unfortunately my case was dismissed. This is the 2nd time I've had this happen now so I doubt ill be taking on any parking firms in future sadly. The judge said I lost it on the grounds that the sign said I had 28 days to declare who the owner of the vehicle was, and said I should have complied with this.  My costs are Judgment for the claimant £133.33 Issue fee Hearing fee Solicitors costs - total £265 grand total £398.33 Do those costs look about right?
  • 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

Deed of Assignment?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2386 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

I thought I'd better start a new thread in regards to this as it may help others find info on the same thing.

 

I asked Cabot finance for a copy CCA and a true copy of the Deed of Assigment. They got back to me saying that they have requested the CCA and it could take up to 40 days which I know is not allowed so sent them another letter in regards to this but my question is that in response to my request for a true copy of the Deed of Assignment they said that

"This document is confidential between the original lender and us and as such, is not available for disclosure. However, the Notice of Assignment was originally sent to your postal address on 18th Oct 2011, which is sufficient evidence to justify our ownership of this account."

 

Now I file everything and have no copy of this notice and also need to know if they are legally obliged to send me the original Deed of Assignment?

 

Please can anyone help?

Thx

Link to post
Share on other sites

No they are correct Allison...only a Court can force disclosure of the DoA...unlike the NoA.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are correct the Deed of assignment is a ''commercially sensitive'' document and is the fianacial contract between the seller and purchaser of a portfolio of accounts so will hold data on more than just your debt, a judge can order its production but would view it privately.

No they are under no obligation legal or otherwise to produce the document.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to muddy the waters on this one a little, I agree that in general the deed is a commercially sensitive doc, however when it is a piece of evidence on which their whole case hangs they will disclose it.

 

I had Cabot on my tail a while ago and contested their ownership of the account, accusing them of fraud by using another companies letterhead with the intent to deceive

 

- they provided me with a heavily redacted copy of the Deed of Assignment, this was used to form part of my defence as there was nothing in the deed which specifically identified my account and the dates did not match.

 

This was a blanket purchase agreement which covered numerous accounts which were allegedly identified in a spreadsheet which accompanied the deed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why requesting a DoA is pointless!

 

Although to be fair, a lot of the time even a NoA seems to be absent, despite DCAs' claims to have sent one previously. One almost wonders if this is a deliberate tactic for some of them, as otherwise it would provide prior alert to their potential victim, when sending any subsequent purposefully vague 'please ring us about an urgent matter' letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why requesting a DoA is pointless!

 

We used the redaction as a part of the defence, which worked, if the deed doesn't show a real link between the assignee and assignor, then it can cast a doubt over their claims of ownership and as most NOA are created by the DCA themselves, there would be nothing from the OC to show any assignment actually occurred.

 

In some cases I have heard (anecdotally) of DCA's have dropped claims entirely rather than reveal the contents of a deed, so whilst I see your point, it's not entirely pointless,

 

Anything that makes them back off must at least deserve a shot

Link to post
Share on other sites

All quite true Spam but unless they accidentally disclose it by error only a Court can force disclosure as per my initial post.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

All quite true Spam but unless they accidentally disclose it by error only a Court can force disclosure as per my initial post.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Oh I have no doubt that this is the case, these creatures will only display what they think is the bare minimum and if they had their way I'm sure they would show nothing at all if they could get away with it. but my dealings with Cabot have taught me three things, always SAR the OC, and make a DCA prove what they are saying is correct by way of documentary evidence andfinally, ask for sight of everything from A to Z, they probably will tell you to go forth, but still worth a punt
Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting point must be what is meant by 'commercially sensitive' in terms of the DOA?, is this to do with witholding sensitive information from ones competitors?, or is more to do with disguising from the punters the tiny amount paid for debt from the OC?. Personally speaking I would have thought that at some time in the future there should be a relationship between the amount paid for the debt and the amount that is able to be recovered from the punter, some hope I know, but what does the OFT consider to be an acceptable profit margin?. Fair trading being the laughable definition!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Commercially sensitive basically means company secrets. Or confidential company information not fit for the public domain.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting but the meaning of 'commercially sensitive' I suspect is a minefield to define and is an excellent way of 'hiding' unpaletable information in favour of the lovely people concerned in the debt business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really wooldra. Almost every single company has commercially sensitive documents.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

100% agree about commercially sensitive documents. My point is more related to the 'gearing' between what is paid for a debt and what the punter is coerced , frightened, bullied into paying. I know that under current legislation you can buy for a pound and sell to the punter the principal that he should pay the original sum for it, as per law of property act 1925. Sure there is entitlement for all companies to make a profit but in this nasty business what should this be 500% 1000% more?, less? Especially as in the majority of cases the people receiving attention are in a distressed financial state, i.e. what is fair?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. But its long been known that these documents would show that a £10,000 debt, usually unenforceable (example) would have been sold for 7-20% of its worth. The DCA then see's a massive profit in it and goes full pelt against the debtor. The sad thing is that a huge percentage of debtors think this debt is still legit, and accept a CCJ and enforcement orders or pay it outright through loans, or even remortgaging. The DCA doesnt care where the money comes from, as long as it goes into their account.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the "good old days" most if not all of what goes on in the financial world would be classed as usury and would be illegal in any court of law.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury

 

unfortunately the banks found a way round the usury laws and so began the vicious spiral of debt buying and selling whereby a "debt" worth say £1000 can be "bought" for £100 and then the buyer can make claim for the full £1000.

In a free market you can buy and sell at a profit on whatever the market will sustain but "debts" have no market value other than what the "debt buyer" can achieve from the debtor

Illegitimi non carborundum

Link to post
Share on other sites

hit the wrong key, ( you owe me £1000)

 

If the alleged debtor objects to the "debt" then the fun begins and the "owner of the debt" has to make financial decisions about the cost of pursuing the particular debt, especially if they have no proof of the alleged debt, just a spreadsheet of names and amounts.

 

Without getting into the FOTL arguments which are weak at best I still think that debt buying and selling is usury at its worst.

Illegitimi non carborundum

Link to post
Share on other sites

The document would be ''commercially sensitive'' because it will contain the details of other accounts bought in a portfolio of debts.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would I think come down to ''reasonable'' costs and I don't think will ever do anyone a lot of good if the deed was produced, you most certainly wont find out what was paid for the debt, just that it was sold on a particular date and the namw of the purchaser. An NOA tells the debtor of the sale/ purchase of a debt.

Debt is sold in bulk at £xxxxxxxxxxx not as indivual accounts with each one separately priced.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am throwing a spanner into the works now. as stated, A request for disclosure of the Deed of Assignment can be made at the CPR 31.14 stage if mentioned in the particulars of claim, though a judge will have to decide on it through objections, The usual routine of a commercially sensitive document means nothing as to case law, and is irrelevant

 

IF NEW CASE LAW IS now in existence to make the case law below redundant then please list it, but as far as i am aware, it still stands to allow the inspection of the Deed of Assignment

 

(Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968 [3] All ER 824).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Creditors/DCs will simply refuse to comply or will produce a meaningless redacted document and leave to a judge to decide further in my experience o 2 occassions when a judge has oredered a view od a deed it has been seen only by the judge in any detail.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Things like any redaction of documents will be left up to legal arguments and directions of the court.

 

The point i am making is that the party to the claim has the right for disclosure as to the case law that has been listed. Commercial sensitivity as a defence not to disclose means nothing

 

But it will still come down to judicial interpretation as to disclosure

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2386 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...