Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I don't think that you have told us when you bought the car. However, you have referred to a conversation in which they apparently told you that the MOT had been carried out on 11 November so that suggests to me that you bought it after that date. Although it seems as if you are dealing with quite a dodgy crowd, you may as well go through the paces of asserting your proper rights. Because you have discovered this issue within the first 30 days – you can add to the strength of your position by sending them a letter asserting a right to reject the vehicle under the consumer rights act. If a car manifests a defect within the first 30 days then you are entitled to reject it out of hand with no chance of repair but you must assert your right in writing. Send them a letter immediately – recorded delivery – informing them that you are rejecting the vehicle and telling them on what grounds and say that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act. It won't make a whole lot of difference, but later on if you find yourself having to take court action, then it will all help. Please let us know when you have had the AA check. Meanwhile, I suggest that you contact me at our admin email address and let me know the identity of the garage and any other identity clues that you have unearthed. It may enable us to give you additional help
    • Assuming you're correct about the limitation running from the last date of deferral. The last deferral was in 2013 so the statute barring period would end on 31 August 2019, the money claim was made on 3rd June 2019 so is within the limitation period. Therefore the debt is not statute barred.
    • I agree with my site team colleague @slick132 but with variations. These people have been needing you around and cause you serious harm in terms of the amount of effort that you have been put to as well as the damage to your credit file. You have taken all sorts of different stories and also been misled by them as to their statutory obligations in respect of data disclosures. It has taken the issue of court claim to get them to make any move. You have taken control of the situation and it is you who has the whip hand at the moment. They are now proposing to telephone you to discuss the matter in some way – but you have no idea. Also, you have no idea who you are going to be speaking to and whether they have authority to commit Virgin to anything at all. If you agree to this phone call then you are at risk of handing control back to them because they will partly ask you to withdraw the action and they will also offer to make a payment as a "gesture of goodwill". Now that you have attracted their attention and they realise that something needs to be taken seriously, I don't think you should let go of the initiative. Please can you post up the email which you received from them. He was it from and what is that person's role within the company. I think you should write to them and refuse the call and tell them that you are happy to discuss matters that you will want to know what it is they think they have to discuss and who will it be who will be phoning you – and will that person has any authority to make decisions. I think should also emphasise to virgin that they are already in breach of their statutory duty. That if they decide to file a defence that they will have to sign it is a statement of truth subject to a sanction for contempt of court and that as they are clearly in breach of their statutory obligations, it would not be possible for them to sign off such a statement of truth and if they do, then you will bring the whole thing to the attention of the court and invite the court to express their own opinion on the matter. I think it's very important that they tell you in advance what they propose to discuss. I think you should tell them that if they're not prepared to disclose the purpose of their phone call and the points that they intend to cover and if the phone call is not made by somebody at a suitably elevated managerial level, then you are not prepared to discuss the matter. I'm afraid that I'm struck by the naïveté of your statement which I suppose is intended to be assertive.   Haven't we reached a point yet where you understand that you can't trust these people and although you may discuss various things on the telephone, if they then are required to minute the conversation and provide you with the resume of the conversation, you are handing them carte blanche to present the conversation in a way that suits them together with nuances included or removed, and generally slanted in their favour. They might not – but you are certainly opening up the possibilities and if that's what they do, how are you going to counter them and say that they have not correctly recorded what you discussed and agreed? You seem to be doing everything you can to keep on handing the baton back to Virgin. I have no idea why. You should not get involved in any telephone conversation unless you have first read our customer services guide and you are recording the call for your own benefit. If you cannot do this or you are not prepared to do this then don't take the call at all. Please will you post up the email that you have received, let me have your comments on what I've posted here and if you agree we will draft a response. You might like to start. Apparently they are proposing to telephone today and so we need to get a move on. If they happen to telephone before you have received a written reply to your message, then you should simply tell the caller that you are still waiting for their response to the email which you sent a little while earlier and you're not prepared to discuss anything until you have their written reply to that.
    • Well done on getting your refund and thanks for the update. I understand that you are still out of pocket. If you would like to get that money back and we will help you and I think it will be fairly straightforward. The amount of money outstanding is scarcely worth his while causing any trouble. It would be very helpful if you could post up a link to the new advertisement and also do you have any pics of the car and also its registration number please. I think we owe this to possible new owners in case they come to this forum.
  • Our picks

MKDP LLP Court Claim - HSBC Credit Card***Struck Out & Costs***


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2465 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

I am posting this on behalf of a relative who has received two Claim Forms out of Northampton (CCBC) County Court.

 

Both are for debts originally with HSBC a) Credit Card (1***.** and b) Bank Loan (1****.**).

 

Both Particulars of Claim are basically the same except the Credit Card uses the wording 'a regulated agreement' whereas the Bank Loan uses the wording 'a loan agreement'.

 

Both say that a Notice of Assignment has been provided to the defendant with a date on the Bank Loan one but on the Credit Card one there is no date. Also that a Default Notice has been served on the defendant (no dates given on either)

 

Finishes with wording that The complainant has complied as far as is necessary with the Pre-Action Conduct Practice Direction.

 

Claim Forms are both dated 29th April 2013.

 

Both claim forms were acknowledged with intention to defend all the claim and asking for the extra 14 days.

 

A letter has been sent for each claim asking under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of the document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:

 

1. The agreement. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing. Further, that any general conditions incorporated in the contract should also be attached.

 

2. The assignment

 

3. The default notice

 

4. A statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached.

 

These letters were sent by Special Delivery and were received and signed for on 7th May by MKDP LLP.

 

In addition to this a SAR was sent to HSBC again by Special Delivery and was received also on 7th May.

 

My relative states that they have not received any notice of assignment or default notice for either of the debts.

 

In addition they also believe that they have not made a payment or acknowledged the debt for the 6 years prior to the issue of the Claim forms (but is close)

 

To date they have received no acknowledgement from MKDP LLP.

 

What is our next step please? Do we now send N244 and also should we also have sent a SAR to MKDP LLP

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

maybe best do a thread for each claim. and type up the particulars for each less any identifiables.

double check re statute bar status. if 100% sure, then is an absolute defence. in addition to whatever else.

there is no strict requirement as such for them to comply with a cpr 31.14 request, but they should if applicable. up to them.

are they small claims?

any missold ppi?

you could do a sar. but, bear in mind that they might refuse as there is litigation. so would be as per the litigation disclosure rules. plus, a sar takes 40 days, if they comply. is it small claims?

stick to all court deadlines. ie submit a defence in time if defending.

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi GT,

 

It's important to separate the two claims so, in dealing with them, the cases don't get confused as suggested already above by Ford.

 

Accordingly, this thread has now been renamed as dealing ONLY with the Credit Card claim. Start a new thread for the Loan Account claim.

 

From here on, this thread should refer only to the Credit Card claim made by HSBC.

 

The SAR was not necessary because the CPR 31.14 request should get you all the info you require. As the claims has not yet been allocated to any claims track, the CPR 31.14 request should be effective.

 

As Ford says, it's vital that you check as best you can when the debt is due to become SB'd. If it's already SB'd, that's it - case over !

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - Particulars of Claim are as follows:

 

The claimant claims the sum of £1,***,** being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under a regulated agreement originally between the defendant and HSBC Bank Plc. The defendants account number was xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and was assigned to the Claimant on (no date), notice of this has been provided to the defendant. The defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant claims the sum o £1,xxx,xx and costs. The Complainant has complied as ar as is necessary with the pre-action conduct practice direction.

 

I am assured that no default notice or notice of assignment has been received.

 

This would be a small claims track.

 

CPR 31.14 sent as above and SAR was sent to HSBC not MKDP LLP

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, you have already sent a sar? see what if anything comes back re that (prob not in time though).

wait see what comes back in time. if nothing, then submit your defence (if defending). as is small claims, they prob would refuse/neglect 31.14 anyway even though not tracked.

double check statute bar

any missold ppi?

they would have to show that a compliant dn (if applicable) and assignment was issued and sent.

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi GT,

 

Please confirm if the CPR 31.14 request was sent to MK or HSBC.

 

:wink:

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, if they fail to supply info in time for you to make a proper defence by the required deadline, you can ask MK to agree to an extension, By Consent, of the deadline for filing your defence.

 

Otherwise, you file your defence by the due date stating that the claimant has failed to supply key documents and/or information and you are therefore unable to make a full defence until this info is provided.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help so far everyone. Is there any chance someone could look at the new thread about the bigger claim that I have posted again by MKDP LLP

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?391771-County-Court-Claim-Form-Loan-From-HSBC-MKDP-LLP-Claimant%282-Viewing%29-nbsp

Link to post
Share on other sites

HSBC are very good at issueing SAR request (NOT) , mine came in two packages = 1. just bumpf, 2nd later (And Late = after ICO intervention, and a promise to up grade their response times = yeah!!!! ) so guess what happened a court case had been dealt with and crucial evidence that could be used against them enclosed in 2nd Bundle! so CPR 31.14 is a real must, if they refuse make sure the evidence required before the case>

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Still trying to get duplicate credit card statements for this but we now know last payment was made on 21/03/2007 - need duplicate statements to see if any purchases made by defendant after 28th April 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

statute bar is usually re from last payment or written acknowlegment whichever is the later. but, i see what you mean, ie would a purchase be regarded as an acknowledgment?

ps, not much point doing reminders re 31.14 request if deemed received. either they reply, or they don't. if applicable, make representations on that if they don't.

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Ford says, if no purchases were made since the last payment on 21st March 2007, the a/c should be Statute Barred and this is an absolute defence.

 

You need to check as best you can to see if any purchase was made later, and when exactly.

 

I'll look at the other thread which you have linked to in post #12 above, and comment there.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats ok. such a request is a statutory requirement for compliance (although they can supply a reconstitution in response, but any recon should be shown to be accurate. if shown not, then should be no enforcement until so. see Kotecha v Phoenix CA case). but note the time limit re that, would it be in time?

there is also cpr practice direction 16 para 7.3 which says that re a claim based on a written agreement, the original 'contract or docs constituting the agreement' should be available at hearing (note; 'should'. and, they often use PD 7E para 5.2A (ie online claim) to avoid that, but it could be argued that 5.2a only applies re attachment of docs re an online claim or separate particulars. ie the originals 'should' still be available at hearing?)

don't forget also the requirement for a compliant default notice before enforcement (if applicable).

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is almost time to submit a defence - would like to do it by Thursday. We have heard nothing at all from MKDP not even an acknowledgement of our requests. I have been looking at various holding defences on the site and have now put the one below togther. It would be appreciated if someone could have a look at it for us please? We have been unable to get any statements so far regarding this account and it may well be that it is statute barred as stated in previous posts but without the relevant statements we can not be 100& certain.

 

 

In the Northampton (CCBC) County Court

 

 

Claim number XXXXXXXX

 

 

Between

 

 

MKDP LLP

 

and

 

 

XXXXXXXXXX – Defendant

 

 

 

 

DEFENCE

 

 

1. I, XXX of XXXXXXXXXXXX am The Defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by MKDP LLP

 

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put The Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim are vague and fail to disclose any cause of action; they appear to be an abuse of the process in that they fail to deal with the basic rules of pleading in accordance with the civil procedure rules. (Even allowing for the constraints of the bulk issue system)

 

4. No documents supporting the claim in the particulars have been offered which The Defendant needs to establish what agreement it is that this action is based upon and so The Claimant's claim appears without merit.

 

5. On receipt of the claim form The Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request for a copy of the agreement, default notice, notice of assignment and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached which form the basis of this claim.

 

6. The Defendant also sent a formal request pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a copy of the agreement.

 

7. It has been confirmed via the Royal Mail website that the above letters were received and signed for.

 

8. To date no response has been received from The Claimant.

 

9. As a result, the Claimants claim does not contain sufficient particulars to permit me to file a properly particularised and pleaded defence. I am at a disadvantage to respond to this claim. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of claim and put the Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

10. It is denied that I have an agreement with MKDP LLP.

 

11. If, which is not admitted, such an agreement exists, the precise terms and date of any such agreement are not admitted. I do not have in my possession any such agreement and am not therefore able to comment thereon. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the date and terms of such agreement.

 

12. Without admission that any cause of action is shown by The Claimant it is denied that I am indebted to The Claimant as alleged or at all.

 

13 It is alleged the Claimant has an agreement and there has been an Assignment. Within the proof of claim it was stated that there had been an assignment to the Claimant on a date which was given as Blank. As such it is contended that no such Notice of Assignment has been served pursuant to Section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925. Without a Notice of Assignment, The Assignment is merely equitable and The Claimant is put to strict proof to disclose this and prove that this claim can commence in their own name.

 

 

14. AND the Defendant

 

Seeks an order that The Claimant’s action is struck out or otherwise is dismissed on the grounds that any claim cannot succeed.

 

i. Alternatively if the court decides not to strike out The Claimant’s case, it is requested that The Court orders full disclosure of the requested documents pursuant to the civil procedure Rules.

 

ii. The Defendant respectfully asks the permission of The Court to amend this defence if or when The Claimant provides full disclosure of the requested documents and allows inspection of the original documents.

 

 

 

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

seems fair at first sight, maybe perhaps with a tweak/trim or two. it seems to address their particulars?, and therefore be 'cpr compliant' re submitting a defence? bumping though for further input :)

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defence now altered after advice on another thread. Hopefully this one is now ok.

 

In the Northampton (CCBC) County Court

 

Claim number XXXXXXXX

 

Between

 

MKDP LLP

 

and

 

 

XXXXXXXXXX – Defendant

 

 

 

 

DEFENCE

 

1. Paragraph 1 is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering in to an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with XXXXXXXXX

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied with regards to the amount the Defendant owing monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(i) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for.

(ii) Show the APR and interest used to calculate the amount claimed for.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is not admitted with regards to the Defendant defaulting on payments and the Claimant is put to strict proof to evidence this breach.

 

4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

The claimant is also put to strict proof:-

 

(i) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

5. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

6. This defence will contend that under the Credit Consumer Act enables Section 140A and the court to make an order (under section 140B) if it determines that the relationship between the lender and the borrower arising out of a credit agreement is unfair to the borrower.

I will asseverate that under sec 140a CCA 2006 amendments CCA1974 that the assigned agreement was subject to an Unfair Relationship with XXXXXXXX due to extortionate interest applied.

Also that the agreement was breached by XXXXXXXX for failing to adhere to The UKCA guidelines once a payment plan arrangement is in place. The Claimant is "estopped" due to promissory estoppel the original Terms and Conditions agreed were varied.

 

7. Further, by reason of the fact that the Claimant was sent a Section 78 CCA 1974 request dated xxxxxxx and signed for by the claimant on xxxxxxxx the Claimant has yet to comply with this request and until such time the Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of the Court, until such time they comply with my request.

 

8. On receipt of the claim form the Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request dated xxxxxxx for a copy of the credit agreement, default notice, notice of assignment and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached, which form the basis of this claim. This was signed for by the claimant on xxxxxxx.

 

9. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...