Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Few tweaks as the run order was completely messed up and the main point of your defence (reconstituted agreement) pushed to the bottom of the statement.   I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. 1.The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act. 2.  I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 3. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this 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. 4.  I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 5. The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’. The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents. 6. Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018. 7. Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicitor's is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’ 8. On (insert date) I successfully made application to set a side the judgment. The claim proceeded to allocation, 9. The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date. (insert date you did receive the documents) I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’. Remove irrelevant 10.The claimant relies upon and has exhibited a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement. It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HHJ Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’. The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause. 11. Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not mislead the court. 12. It is denied I have ever received a default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.The claimant is put to strict proof to evidence from the original creditors internal document software the trigger of said notice.  13.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. 14. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024   Run 3 copies Court /Claimants Sol/File
    • As one of you mentioned above I've been in a mess for nearly 20 years now and I'm ready to sort my credit report out now - the main reason I got into second round of debt is my kids being unwell and the state considering them not unwell enough for extra help so despite my son being in hospital for 3 months in one year we got extra zero help and I eventually lost my job and got into debt to just so I can be تا my sons hospital bed at his time of need - my life basically fell apart and all these debts got me again 
    • Gosh mate I've woke up this morning with half the worry I had last night when going to sleep!.  I can't believe how much this forum has helped me over the years and I don't  have the words to explain the gratitude I feel towards you guys -  Now that I've slept on it I feel ready to reject this company and my plan is to make them an offer to accept payments to date as full and final settlement - I will I think write them a letter once my review is completed or maybe just send it now whilst they are reviewing explaining my kids are unwell for which reason I'm struggling to survive and if I can politely request for them to accept payment to date as a full and final - I'll mention I don't have any cash or anyone to borrow from to offer a full or even part amount of the remaining balance of the iva and therfore am unable to make a offer of payment.   If they agree to at least even put my offer to the creditors then I feel it's better I hang in there and that way I won't have to deal with any possibilities of more defaults and ccjs    Right now the only adverse effects on my credit report are the iva that is now 3 years old and 2 Ccj one coming of this July and one thus October.    But I am worried new action will begin and new defaults and Ccj may start to appear because I've paying into an agreement im under the impression the 6 year rules starts again so yes I have lost of mixed feelings about this but I'm not going to lie you guys have put some life back into my breath this week as for the last 3 years I've felt caged like an animal and this morning I feel freer I can't explain how much but certainly my soul feel lighter today thanks to yin because I'm now viewing this review totally different to I do yesterday thanks to you guys 
    • Court name UNKNOWN Case number ********** Amount N/A Confirmed by Insolvency Service Date issued May 2021 Type Voluntary Arrangement Notes If you have questions about voluntary arrangements you should speak to the Insolvency Service.     I started this in 2021. So it's been about 3 years I've been paying. 
    • Thanks @lookinforinfo@Nicky Boyi sent across the agreement earlier in this thread. No mention of financial reward to the MA. But, I wouldn't be surprised if it was done on the sly. As I said earlier, the owner of OPS is a convicted criminal, with a very shady reputation around these parts.
  • 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

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Best of luck Belstar.

 

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

Thanks All,

 

I keep on thinking that I've missed something out :madgrin:

 

If you have a moment you wouldn't mind taking a look and over the last few posts from the last couple of days just to reassure myself - I can at least make notes and refer to them in court tomorrow.

 

Cheers,

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

 

A bit mixed.

 

The judge was a little exasperated with the solicitor as he appeared not to understand the CCA! The solicitor completely disregarded the first set of DN and TN and kept on referring to the second set and insisting that they were correct. The judge pointed out in their POC that they had not supplied the Notice of Default Sum as per Sec 86c and as such he could not rule in their favour. He stated that he was sure the OC had sent them but until it was presented to the court, they cannot enforce.

 

I pointed out that this was referring to the second DN and TN and asked what about the first. The judge responded that legal precedent had been set that even with a situation like this, a creditor does have the right to reissue a DN and subsequent TN.

 

Should have asked but didn't think what case law he was referring to.

 

Does anyone know what he is referring to?

 

I then asked if the fact that the fees were incorrect on the first DN and made up to teh tune of approximately 50% of fees made any difference and he referred me to the claimants solicitor and said 'Can you speak to them on that'!

 

The solicitor then said to me outside then said that even though the late payment fee was £20 for each additional month thereafter as it was either a default notice or a failure to promise to pay, they were within their rights to charge £25??? I asked him what was his definition of 'Promise to Pay' and he said me signing an agreement to pay £xx on a certain date. I would have taken it as I have agreed to pay £x to an agent of the company.

 

I will look into that as I know that some charges were made after 8 or so months of perfect payments that inured the fee of £25 the moment they were missed so that would seem to dispute what he is saying.

 

In short the judge said the claimant needs to supply the Notice of Default Sum relating to the DN and they are likely to win their claim as the default fees can legally be included.

 

He did not accept my claim for the 'fiddling' of the date of service relating the original court order and even though I had written to them last week giving my explanation for the lateness of my witness statement, I was penalised for only getting it to the court yesterday and have to pay costs of £60 for wasted time as he said the claimant did not have adequate time to respond.

 

I should have pointed out that they got theirs at 11am yesterday but hey, ho!

 

I asked again about the first set of DN and TN and he quoted 'Affirmation of contract' due to the fact I still am in possession of the item so said that's unlikely to stand!

 

Not too sure what to make of all of this and what my come back should or could be?

 

Your thoughts?

 

bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a mixed bag there Belstar but he didn't let it go their way.When are the to disclose the Notice of Default Sum by?

 

For info where a repudiatory breach of contract occurs, the innocent party must elect either to treat the contract as terminated (acceptance of the repudiation), or to treat it as continuing (affirmation of the contract).

Affirmation can only take place if the innocent party knows of the breach and of his right to choose between terminating and affirming the contract. Affirmation will often be implied if the innocent party knows of the breach and of his right to choose and acts in a manner consistent with treating the contract as continuing.

 

Although the innocent party does have time to elect whether to affirm or terminate, doing nothing for too long may be seen as an affirmation. Once an innocent party has affirmed a contract, the affirmation is irrevocable.

 

Well done on holding your corner.

 

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

Hi Andy,

 

The judge has given 21 days for the claimant to supply it via a witness statement and will then go for the first available 30 minute hearing after that.

 

Regarding the affirmation, could it be argued that as I had told them they had messed up and terminated when they did and all arrears were paid up and therefore they had revoked all rights to enforce and I was keeping it?

 

I thought that that was the case when an agreement was terminated incorrectly?

 

Do you know of the case law he was referring to?

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure it really applies in credit term claims Belstar...is the card still live...do you still have the use of this facility?

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

Ah right...my apologies ...do you still have the car ? sorry if you have already explained this.

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

Ok I see where the DJ is going with this so if you didn't elect (inform them) of the repudiatory breach of contract (Termination) then you have accepted (elected) affirmation....that basically throws the DN/TN argument out of the mix.

 

I will just bring my previous post forward for others to respond.

 

Where a repudiatory breach of contract occurs, the innocent party must elect either to treat the contract as terminated (acceptance of the repudiation), or to treat it as continuing (affirmation of the contract).

Affirmation can only take place if the innocent party knows of the breach and of his right to choose between terminating and affirming the contract. Affirmation will often be implied if the innocent party knows of the breach and of his right to choose and acts in a manner consistent with treating the contract as continuing.

 

Although the innocent party does have time to elect whether to affirm or terminate, doing nothing for too long may be seen as an affirmation. Once an innocent party has affirmed a contract, the affirmation is irrevocable.

 

 

They still have to get around the Notice of Default Sums though regardless of the above.

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

And the relevant Legislation for that :-

 

11Failure to give notice of sums in arrears

 

After section 86C of the 1974 Act (inserted by section 10 of this Act) insert—

“86DFailure to give notice of sums in arrears

 

(1)This section applies where the creditor or owner under an agreement is under a duty to give the debtor or hirer notices under section 86B but fails to give him such a notice—

 

(a)within the period mentioned in subsection (2)(a) of that section; or

 

(b)within the period of six months beginning with the day after the day on which such a notice was last given to him.

 

(2)This section also applies where the creditor under an agreement is under a duty to give the debtor a notice under section 86C but fails to do so before the end of the period mentioned in subsection (2) of that section.

 

(3)The creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enforce the agreement during the period of non-compliance.

 

(4)The debtor or hirer shall have no liability to pay—

 

(a)any sum of interest to the extent calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance or to any part of it; or

 

(b)any default sum which (apart from this paragraph)—

 

(i)would have become payable during the period of non-compliance; or

 

(ii)would have become payable after the end of that period in connection with a breach of the agreement which occurs during that period (whether or not the breach continues after the end of that period).

 

(5)In this section ‘the period of non-compliance’ means, in relation to a failure to give a notice under section 86B or 86C to the debtor or hirer, the period which—

 

(a)begins immediately after the end of the period mentioned in (as the case may be) subsection (1)(a) or (b) or (2); and

 

(b)ends at the end of the day mentioned in subsection (6).

 

(6)That day is—

 

(a)in the case of a failure to give a notice under section 86B as mentioned in subsection (1)(a) of this section, the day on which the notice is given to the debtor or hirer;

 

(b)in the case of a failure to give a notice under that section as mentioned in subsection (1)(b) of this section, the earlier of the following—

 

(i)the day on which the notice is given to the debtor or hirer;

 

(ii)the day on which the condition mentioned in subsection (4)(a) of that section is satisfied;

 

©in the case of a failure to give a notice under section 86C, the day on which the notice is given to the debtor.”

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

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

 

Dear Bel

 

In respect of the first para above, if amount stated in DN is inaccurate, then you rely upon the Woodchester v Swain case in your Defence.

 

No record, apparently! of the telephone calls recorded between you and the DCA - the creditor's nominated agent to deal with this matter - not showing up on your SAR is questionable, that is, these parties, the main contractor and the subcontractor, on the balance of probabilities would have discussed this matter/your account via an agent communication system, which is a filing system that is readily accessible and easily located within their internal system for the daily administration involved between these two parties as regards the same and would, therefore, hold your personal data relating to this account and all correspondence - sent and received between all three of you parties, will be recorded therein.

 

Re-examine the SAR file that you have been sent, you may find a particular number or abbreviated ref occurring therein relating to your account - such would be classed and recognised in law as a data filing system, any personal data held therein relating to you and the account you held with this Co. is disclosable to you pursuant to your s.7 rights of access under the DPA 1998.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

Just a quick one

 

In writing to them and telling them where they messed up, does that give me a basis with which to argue the affirmation angle?

 

Secondly, they or their solicitor was wrong about the fees. He advised that they have the right to charge the default fees rate of £25 if I had missed two, however they charged the default fees right off the bat.

 

This would and does affect both DN and TN's that were issued.

 

Can they then simply correct these 'errors' and start the whole ball rolling again?

 

Cheers,

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further argument can be raised within a supplemental Witness Statement Bell...are you at that stage yet ..have you already submitted a WS?

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

Hi Andy,

 

I have already entered my WS which has been accepted as my defence.

 

The OC have been given the opportunity to supply another WS which should attach the Notice of Default Sums. They have sent one to me showing the balloon payment of the car and nothing else and I'm assuming that is what they will be supplying with the WS to the court however the letter did not state that 'this is our ws etc'. They've been given until 17th September to supply their WS so we'll see then

 

Bel

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...