Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • god they've got at you haven't they. told you all the usual utter BS. a CCJ vanishes from your credit file on it's 6th B'Day regardless to being paid off or not or paying or not. same with any debt with a registered defaulted date - it vanishes from your file on the DN's 6th B'day regardless. creditfix are Knightsbridge, (they renamed) there are 100's of threads here on Knightsbridge, if i remember rightly 2 of the directors of a certain very big IVA provider were struck off for embezzling £1m's out of debtors. pers i'd stop paying now.  end of . just ignore them all. 99% of your debts are to utterly powerless DCA's and probably were never owed in the first place only goes to firm up my belief from post one..you got had blind. its very easy to deal with the debts even those with CCJ's. can you copy and paste what you credit file says regarding the IVA please?   
    • The airline says it is investigating reports that customers can view other passengers' personal information.View the full article
    • They are finding new ways to cut back on household spending as China’s economy loses steam.View the full article
    • Sorry I meant credit fix - I really wish I'd known this before - kicking myself right now  If they come back to me asking for more money I'll cancel it and start trying to deal with the debt myself let's see what they say  Feeling tempted to cancel it now but scared that some of the debts will do more CCJ's on me and I'll have to wait 6 years again.  2 of the CCJ come of this year and then I'll only have the iva in credit file - effectively if I'd have not took out the iva in 2021 I'd have clear score by now - but then again would I because I would have been hounded the last 3 years, as bad as it is it's saves me lots of headaches whilst my debt was still within the 6 year mark.  I think most of them are near there but in all honesty no point chasing them if I do cancel iva I'd jjst wait for the ones who contact me and then start the relevant letter process on them.  Of over 6 years easy if not still possible to write off. My true victory would be having the iva wiped off my credit file as mis sold or something that way I Don't have to wait till 2027 Other option is to fight back and ask for them to offer the creditors to accept payments so far and use the following method    Will your IVA firm agree to complete your IVA on the basic of funds paid to date? The Guidance lists a lot of factors to be considered in deciding whether a settlement on the basis of funds paid to date should be proposed. You should read the list. But that may not give you any feel for whether they apply to you or not. The following are my thoughts on when an IVA should be treated as settled, not failed. They assume that you have £75 or less to pay a month: if you would currently qualify for a Debt Relief Order, then your IVA should be settled now  There is no point in making your IVA fail and you have to apply for a DRO – it will not generate another penny for your creditors. If you are renting and owe less than £50,000, check the DRO criteria now and talk to National Debtline on 0808 808 4000 about whether you qualify. You may have been told at the start of your IVA that you aren’t eligible – still check now as the DRO criteria have changed, your situation has got worse, and some people were given incorrect information about DROs at the start. if you have no assets that would be realised in bankruptcy (eg a house with equity, car worth over £2000), then your IVA should be settled now Same as (1), there is no point in making you apply for bankruptcy after your IVA fails. if your only asset is a car that is worth less than £8000, then your IVA should be settled now A car that is worth say £5000 would normally be sold in bankruptcy and you would be given a small amount to buy a cheaper car. But your creditors would not get any benefit from this as the Insolvency Service takes the first £8000 raised to cover its own costs. if you have significant assets, the closer you are to the end of the IVA, the less reasonable it is to fail it If you have been paying your IVA for 4 years, you have done your best over a long period. It isn’t your fault you can no longer continue. The fact you may have had equity to release isn’t relevant as that simply isn’t going to be possible. if your situation will clearly improve soon, then it’s unlikely your IVA will be settled I mean real improvements, not hoping that prices fall. If I can get them to accept payment to date or threaten with cancellation hopefully they may accept it -  Other option is to try and borrow money and pay make a full and final offer  Or I can just ignore and hope for the best which I'm very tempted to do especially if they respond to my review with bullying tactics despite me being skint as a fart with no mortgage as renting  It's so stressful but I've just checked the iva agreement from 2021 and it's Cabot 2 accounts Lowell about 5 accounts and then lots of repeats of the same debt with for example zopa and Cabot same amount listed twice -  also loyyds banks but I'm sure that's older than 6 years and not on credit file anyway  If I can somehow remove the iva from my credit file I'd be happy 
    • India has one of the world's fastest growing economies but the benefits are yet to fully reach the poorest.View the full article
  • 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

Judge Ordered Claimant To Supply Info - They Haven't


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3886 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

Hi Bazza,

 

Will do.

 

Yes they have finally complied and the statements back up my argument, however it wasn't sent in time to meet the deadline given by the court which means I have next to no time to prepare my case.

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Bazza,

 

Will do.

 

Yes they have finally complied and the statements back up my argument, however it wasn't sent in time to meet the deadline given by the court which means I have next to no time to prepare my case.

 

Bel

 

Respectfully ask the court to strike out their claim / allow your claim, or if the court feels unable to do so, seek further time to prepare your case based on their failure to provide you with the documents.

 

The court will be able to recognise "data dumping" (supplying information out of time to deluge one of the parties with too much info to digest properly in time.

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Phew, a little boggle eyed from all the number crunching but so glad that I did it.

 

I put all the information that the OC had supplied into a spreadsheet broken down by week showing the contractual payments, the payments actually made and when, the charges due, the actual charges applied to the account and any charges refunded.

 

What it showed was that firstly, instead of charging me the £20 the agreement stated for late payments, they were actually charging me the stated DN fee of £25.

 

In addition, the agreement stated that they can only charge a DN fee if I go 2 or more payments overdue. Again, taking this from their own paperwork, there were only 2 occasions that they could charge that fee. All the other times, I was actually in credit or less than two months in arrears.

 

The spreadsheet also shows that even with the refunds, I have been over charged and subsequently overpaid on fees which were included in the DN and TN.

 

More importantly, when they served their penultimate DN on which they then served their first TN, from their own statement of account the amount on the DN includes the charges which were either wrong in their amount or should not have been charged anyway.

 

Even though I had told them that the fees were incorrect and hadn't responded to my letter of complaint, they still went ahead and terminated the agreement. It also shows that I had paid more than the outstanding arrears at the time of the DN and TN after the agreement was terminated.

 

I intend to quote the pertinent parts from Woodchester v Swain - are there any other additional cases/CCA law that anyone knows of that I can also quote?

 

I had written to the court pointing out that the solicitor could not have served the statement of account when they said they had due to the fact the time and date stamp on the fax together with the fact it also had the date the report was run right in the middle of the page shows that it had to be sent after the date they have sworn service took place.

 

As I have still to hear back from the court as to whether they are going to agree to my claim to have it struck out at this stage, I am preparing my case just in case.

 

Any other support/advice/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks all,

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an aside, do you think I should put in a complaint about the solicitors actions? The more I think about it, the more I'm shocked.

 

If they can lie about something like this on a sworn statement instead of holding their hands up and admitting they messed up, what else would they lie about?

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

 

Having not heard from the court, I called them this morning to be advised that even though I had sent them proof that the solicitors had lied, they are not changing the court date by either allowing my claim or allowing me extra time.

 

Not too sure how to take or what to read into that?

 

I'm preparing my witness statement as will need to get this to the court and the solicitors by tomorrow.

 

Any suggestions to my previous questions on Saturday would be greatly appreciated!

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not enough of an expert to cite the case law, but go with pointing out the overcharges and erroneous DN's.

 

By all means point out the "data dumping" and "mistaken dates", and your request for extra time as a reason you may not be as prepared as you'd like : but the court ruled not to reschedule, so don't challenge them directly.

 

Get court proceedings sorted, mentioning the solicitors behaviour, before considering an SRA complaint : if the court mentions it when ruling it can be extra ammo!

 

Can someone more knowledgable than me comment on the effect of the false fees on any DN, and then any TN?

Might the TN become defective? If defective, is the agreement still extant / enforceable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bazza,

 

Have just picked up on another nugget. The OC had agreed to waive some of the fees that were erroneous and at the time these made the DN defective and therefore the TN null and void. The refund was made well after both DN and TN were issued. On their statement, it shows the fees as being refunded in March however, I have a letter direct from the manager and the complaints department that show that the refund took place in May. If it had taken place in March, I would not have a valid argument. As it stands, it now appears that I can now add falsifying records to suit themselves to the mix?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWCA Civ 905

Case No: A2/2007/1827

IN THESUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

MR JUSTICE FIELD

HQ04X03766

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

30 July 2008

B e f o r e :

THE RT HON. LORD JUSTICE WARD

THE RT HON LORD JUSTICE SEDLEY

and

THE RT HON LORD JUSTICE WALL

____________________

Between:

 

(1) Burkhard Hedrich

(2) Hedrich Consult

Claimants

- and -

Standard Bank London Limited

Appellants

- and -

Messrs Zimmers

Respondents

I have just briefly read your case (speed reading that is)and as regards non – disclosure or non-compliance with a Court Order on thesame, perhaps have a good read of the above authority (search same by google orwhatever search engine you use) as itmay help you with further argument against this represented party and hissolicitors acting.

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further, if default notice is not compliant with s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended), then Claimant cannot continue to enforcement action (the said s.87(1)) provides you with a complete Defence if the creditor has not complied with the same - search Harison v Link and American Express v Brandon and of course Woodchester v Swain.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you The Mould and Bazza!

 

You are most welcome my dear fellow CAG member. The authorities that I have cited for you are most important as regards your Defence to this action and all your legal arguments against the same. Study the same my good friend, print off copies of the same for yourself, a copy for the Court and a copy for the Claimant.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The first and crucial DN included 35 default charges of which only 19 were 'valid'. However, all but 3 of those charges were charged out at the DN rate of £25 when they should have been charged out at the late payment rate of £20. Those fees are contained within the signed agreement and they have supplied no confirmation that that their rates were going to change.

 

At the time the DN was issued, I was still waiting for a response to a letter of complaint querying said charges and the OC didn't respond directly, their only response being a TN.

 

Their DCA contacted us and I explained to them why we felt they had no right to do what they were doing (defective DN etc means they can't enforce etc) and they came back with the offer of paying half the fees and the arrears. We paid what they told us was the arrears and the fees.

 

Another complaint went to the OC over the handling of that payment between the OC and the DCA as they had lied about what was said during the various conversations. A SAR was sent asking for a transcript of the conversations as the DCA told me all calls were recorded, but despite 6 requests, this has not been forthcoming!

 

I then notice on the statement supplied by the OC that the last payment to clear the arrears was moved a month on from when we actually paid it and the default fees was moved 2 months back even though they were paid at the same time. If the default fees had been paid when they said, I would be on very thin ice as the difference in which it would have been detrimental to me would have been minimal. But I have two letters that clearly state when the payments were made from different departments within the OC's company which give the same information, so copies of these will also be presented to the court.

 

There's a common pattern of both the OC and the solicitors amending things in an attempt to strengthen their case however I have letters to back me up.

 

So yes, I think I have ample proof that it does not meet the requirements of the act to be acceptable.

 

Would you agree?

 

Bel

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to add that my spreadsheet also shows that the arrears that they quoted in the DN was actually arrears and default charges. The actual amount to remedy the breach should have been less than half.

 

Bel

 

Yes, I agree with your contentions. What about the remedy date - 14 clear days to remedy the default relied upon by your creditor (s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended). The default notice appears to be invalid based upon your posts here, therefore, no enforcement proceedings can be continued by your creditor based upon his breach of his statutory duties under s.87(1) of the said act.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The first and crucial DN included 35 default charges of which only 19 were 'valid'. However, all but 3 of those charges were charged out at the DN rate of £25 when they should have been charged out at the late payment rate of £20. Those fees are contained within the signed agreement and they have supplied no confirmation that that their rates were going to change.

 

At the time the DN was issued, I was still waiting for a response to a letter of complaint querying said charges and the OC didn't respond directly, their only response being a TN.

 

Their DCA contacted us and I explained to them why we felt they had no right to do what they were doing (defective DN etc means they can't enforce etc) and they came back with the offer of paying half the fees and the arrears. We paid what they told us was the arrears and the fees.

 

Another complaint went to the OC over the handling of that payment between the OC and the DCA as they had lied about what was said during the various conversations. A SAR was sent asking for a transcript of the conversations as the DCA told me all calls were recorded, but despite 6 requests, this has not been forthcoming!

 

I then notice on the statement supplied by the OC that the last payment to clear the arrears was moved a month on from when we actually paid it and the default fees was moved 2 months back even though they were paid at the same time. If the default fees had been paid when they said, I would be on very thin ice as the difference in which it would have been detrimental to me would have been minimal. But I have two letters that clearly state when the payments were made from different departments within the OC's company which give the same information, so copies of these will also be presented to the court.

 

There's a common pattern of both the OC and the solicitors amending things in an attempt to strengthen their case however I have letters to back me up.

 

So yes, I think I have ample proof that it does not meet the requirements of the act to be acceptable.

 

Would you agree?

 

Bel

 

Bel

Thank you for the above Bel

 

Notwithstanding the errors in the DN and the terms and conditions affecting such, what is the date of DN notice and the date stated therein for you to remedy the breach relied upon therein?

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought as much.

 

The date is just about within by a day - not enough for a court to rule in my favour on that I'm afraid ;-)

 

Thanks again The Mould

 

Don't worry, date and amount to remedy the breach relied upon must comply with s.87(1)!

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Based upon what you say, amount to remedy breach relied upon by creditor is inaccurate, therefore, invalid for the purposes of s.87(1) and so.......creditor not entitled to terminate and demand full amount claimed on the account! Creditor has actually repudiated on the contract! Look this up (repudiation of contract and innocent party's options to elect as consequence of such fundamental breach of contract)

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi The Mound,

 

Have read some articles and wondered if you could clarify something for me.

 

Why do you think they have repudiated the contract as opposed to recission?

 

Bel

 

Recission is a remedy under the common law that is available for the innocent party to elect as a remedy.

 

Repudiation is where one party to a contract refuses to honour his obligations thereunder and treats such as no longer valid.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...