lowell joined 3 debts [2 mobile, 1 credit card]made me BK, now want my house!!

[Desperate Daniella]

More traditional?

 

It's 2013 not 1953.

 

I said: "More traditional, for want of a better word." I was being polite about the person they suggested. I also said she may possibly be wonderful. I would want someone with considerable experience handling this situation, not someone who qualified a couple of years ago. As I said, I work with a number of solicitors. I would have been put off by the FB profile, but I would have spoken to her as I suggested wendyboats did. As it happens the solicitor didn't even phone.

 

wendyboats, The Mould has given brilliant advice on this Forum and I am glad he is helping you here.

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

Goodness me DD

 

I am very unwell at the present, have been for over a year, your comments on my post has me in tears.

 

Thank you so kindly for your consideration. I sincerely hope that I can help Wendyboats to succeed in this mater and bring and end to her/her private household's life based upon what I believe to be an ocean of injustice inflicted against her.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

 

But it is all absolutely true. I have followed the advice you have given on several threads and it's been brilliant.

 

I am so sorry to hear you have been unwell. I do hope things improve soon.

 

It's great that you have come on to this thread. As you say, wendyboats has had an ocean of injustice inflicted against her.

 

Kind regards,

 

DDx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

I am so glad that things seem to be moving in the right direction for you now. I'll look forward to hearing of the positive outcome.

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

I've been following the thread all the way through, but wasn't commenting because you were in The Mould's very capable hands.

 

DDx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi The Mould,

 

I am so sorry you are still unwell. We know you always do as much as you can to help on CAG, and you have been absolutely wonderful to wendyboats.

 

I hope you get a diagnosis and feel better soon, and I hope we hear something positive from wendyboats too.

 

Hugs to you both.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

wendyboats,

 

I am so shocked by your solicitors' conduct.

 

Follow The Mould's advice. They should at least make that application for you.

 

There are good solicitors and barristers out there and you just have to find the right one. Good luck in your search.

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

OMG indeed. Can you give a few more details of what she says in her letter.

[Desperate Daniella]

Watson

 

I know that you are unwell, my wife suffers from multiple sclerosis secondary progressive, we are a young family, I really do know your suffering from this cursed disease. I am not religious and I loath all religion on this earth, If you arte willing to give all your strength to fight this, then, although my wife suffers and needs me all day every day and my children need me all day everyday, superdudes I call them, they are only young Watson, then we can put our head together and hopefully other fellow members of CAG will come on board our carriage and give all the help that they arte able to;

 

After all, this is the CONSUMER ACTION GROUOP, A GROUP THAT TAKES ACTION FOR THE CONSUMER (I am not shouting dear fellow members), are we going to join together to help wendyboats/Watson or are we all just going to say "let the evil win"?

 

I know that I am not the only member of a group that takes action for its loyal members, true that there will be many who do not understand this area of law, I am one of them, but like all peoples we all have the ability to learn and to use that knowledge to help our fellow neighbours who foind themselves struggling in their darkest hours.

 

I, therefore, call upon the Consumer Action Group to help this dear lady, you have all read this case, you all know that the proposed outcome is wrong in law, help me then, to help this dear lady. I know that there are many of you who are capable of dealing with this case, I understand that you have your family and commitments to meet, but the man made clock of hours affords you sometime to yourselves, are you willing to give that up in order to help this dear lady?

 

Kind regards from the middle of my heart and Godzilla to you all.

 

The Mould

 

I am so very sorry to hear that your wife is so unwell. MS is a wicked disease and very cruel and unpredictable. You are clearly a tower of strength to your wife and children at a time when you too are in bad health.

 

You also give so much here to so many people.

 

I do hope you get a proper diagnosis soon.

 

As you say, let's hope others come on board to help Wendy too. You have done a fastastic job so far.

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

I was wondering if she had been following the thread because we know Lowell's do watch CAG.

 

And you could be right about the valuation too.

[Desperate Daniella]

The Mould,

 

That is an amazing letter.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

wendyboats,

 

I haven't read through the entire thread again, but did you ever post up the so-called agreements they sent you? If not, can you do that.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi DD

Its mostly on a down load disk from BWG and it will not let me black out names so I will have to write it, I did put it in earlier threads but as you say id have to go through them all !

 

Please don't worry for now. I'll have a read through tomorrow. Just a bit pressed for time this evening.

 

DDx

[Desperate Daniella]

Godzilla, will wait for this.

 

Do you have any letters of correspondence whereby the creditor was aware that you were no residing at your usual address?

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

 

Who is drinking a load of rum to help me to help you with this case, because the rum is numbing the pain I suffer from.

 

Let you not be put off by this, and I refer you to the midnight club started by me and "wish me well" three years ago; wish me well succeeded on her case; the midnight club was a means whereby we could unload our suffering through comedy, which relieved us of the creditor's stress, wish me well succeeded on her case and the Halifax were left like slaughtered lambs on the battlefield.

 

Don't give up just yet Watson.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

 

The Midnight Club sounds great fun. Enjoy the rum.

[Desperate Daniella]

wendyboats,

 

I've seen what you have written about the Default Notice, but what we need is the 'Agreement' you allegedly signed. Was it an application form?

 

Consumer Credit Agreements must contain the Prescribed Terms. These are the rates of interest, and so on. They can't send you something separately at a later date.

 

When exactly did you take out the agreement in 2006? In the T&Cs they have sent you, what does it give as the late payment charges?

[Desperate Daniella]

Sorry you are feeling so low today, wendyboats.

 

When you feel up to it can you see if the Prescribed Terms are included in the so-called agreement(s) you signed.

 

The Prescribed Terms are:

 

1. A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined, or that there is no credit limit.

 

2. A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the Agreement.

 

3. A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the Agreement to make the repayments which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following:

 

(a) number of repayments;

 

(b) amount of repayments;

 

© frequency and timing of repayments;

 

(d) dates of repayments;

 

or (e) the manner in which any of the above may be determined

 

in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

These terms should be in the document you actually signed. Typing up conditions on blank white paper and typing your name and address at the top doesn't count.

 

I've looked at dozens of the earlier CapOne agreements and none of them were worded properly. The card companies started to get their act together around 2006/2007 so your agreement may or may not have been enforceable. Obviously this comes after you have won the appeal to get everything back to the beginning but if the agreement is unenforceable then that is a further negotiating point.

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

Are those T&Cs actually on the page you signed, or are they on separate sheets? What they used to do was have an application form asking for name, address, etc., and the only condition referred to was about Data Protection. You say it looks so shrunk you can't read the T&Cs which would indicate a cut and paste job.

 

Do you have anyone with the computer skills to post it all up here (removing all your personal details, of course).

 

I do think you should be encouraged by the fact that the Trustee has written to say she'll consider alternatives to selling the house. The ultimate aim however is to get the first judgment set aside so you aren't liable at all for this horrendous sum.

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

R v Leicester City Justices,ex p. Barrow [1991] 2 QB260 (CA) where it was said that –

'if a party arms himself with assistance in orderthe better himself to present his case, it is not a question of seeking theleave of the court. It is a question of the court objecting and restricting himin the use of this assistance, if itis clearly unreasonable in nature or degree or if it becomes apparent that the'assistance' is not being provided bona fide, but for an improper purpose or isbeing provided in a way which is inimical to the proper and efficientadministration of justice by, for example, causing the party to wastetime, advising the introduction of irrelevant issues or the asking ofirrelevant or repetitious questions” (my emphasis added)

The court observed in particular that—

• The purpose of allowing a litigant in person the assistance of a McKenzie friend is to further the interests of justice by achieving a level playing field and ensuring a fair hearing. The presumption in favour of allowing a litigant in person the assistance of a McKenzie friend is very strong. Such a request should only be refused for compelling reasons and should a judge identify such reasons, she/he must explain them carefully and fully to both the litigant in person and the would-be McKenzie friend.
  
• Where a litigant in person wishes to have the assistance of a McKenzie friend in private family law proceedings relating to children, the sooner that intention is made known to the court and the sooner the court's agreement for the use of the particular McKenzie friend is obtained, the better. In the same way that judicial continuity is important, the McKenzie friend, if she/he is to be involved, will be most useful to the litigant in person and to the court if she/he is in a position to advise the litigant throughout.
  
• It is not good practice to exclude the proposed McKenzie friend from the courtroom or chambers whilst the application by the litigant in person for her/his assistance is being made. The litigant who needs the assistance of a McKenzie friend is likely to need the assistance of such a friend to make the application for her/his appointment in the first place. In any event, it is helpful for the proposed McKenzie friend to be present so that any concerns about him can be ventilated in her/his presence, and so that the judge can satisfy herself/himself that the McKenzie friend fully understands her/his role (and in particular the fact that disclosure of confidential court documents is made to her/him for the purposes of the proceedings only) and that the McKenzie friend will abide by the court's procedural rules.
  
• In this context it will always be helpful for the court if the proposed McKenzie friend can produce either a short curriculum vitae or a statement about herself/himself, confirming that she/he has no personal interest in the case, and that she/he understands both the role of the McKenzie friend and the court's rules as to confidentiality.
  
• The following do not, of themselves, constitute 'compelling reasons' for refusing the assistance of a McKenzie friend:
  

(1) that the litigant inperson appears to the judge to be of sufficient intelligence to be able toconduct the case on his own without the assistance of a McKenzie friend;

(2) that the litigant in person appears to the judge to have a sufficientmastery of the facts of the case and of the documentation to enable him toconduct the case on his own without the assistance of a McKenzie friend;

(3) that the hearing at which the litigant in person seeks the assistance of aMcKenzie friend is a directions appointment, or a case management appointment;

(4) that the proceedings are confidential and that the court papers containsensitive information relating to the family's affairs.

The court also expressed the view that there was no reason in principlewhy a litigant in person should not show the court papers to hiscourt-sanctioned McKenzie friend, provided that the latter appreciated thatdisclosure was being made only for the purpose of enabling the litiganteffectively to present his case. This aspect of the court's judgment is now ofhistorical interest only following the introduction of an entirely newprovision in the FPR, namely r.10.20A. This is quite a lengthy rule whichgoverns the communication of information relating to any proceedings held inprivate to which the FPR apply where the proceedings—

(1) relate to the exercise ofthe inherent jurisdiction of the High Court with respect to minors;

(2) are brought under the Children Act 1989; or

(3) otherwise relate wholly or mainly to the maintenance or upbringing of aminor.

The rule expressly permits the communication of any information relatingto the proceedings by a party to the proceedings to a 'lay adviser or McKenziefriend'. A lay adviser is defined by the rule as 'a non-professional person whogives lay advice on behalf of an organisation in the lay advice sector' andMcKenzie friend as 'any person permitted by a court to sit beside anunrepresented litigant in court to assist that litigant by prompting, takingnotes and giving him advice'.

The Court of Appeal referred in passing to the fact that in R vLeicester City Justices and Another ex parte Barrow and Another [1991] 2 QB260 at 289 Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR expressed -

'the fervent hope … that weshall hear no more of "McKenzie friends" as if they were a form ofunqualified legal assistant known to the law. Such terminology obscures thereal issue which is fairness or unfairness. Let the "McKenzie friend"join the "Piltdown man" in decent obscurity.'

The court noted, however, that the passage of time had demonstrated thatthe term McKenzie friend had become well-recognised and understood by lawyersand litigants alike, and expressed the view that the term was here to stay.That seems to be confirmed by the fact that the McKenzie friend has now earnedhimself a mention in rules of court.

Gany, I am not acting outside of the law and I am not providingan unregulated service as far as the legal profession is concerned, I do notprofess to be a solicitor and I am not committing any offence in respect of myadvice, opinion, help, support and referring Wendy to the law as regards hercase.

To my mind, you have become a troll on this thread and youhave offered nothing that Wendy can rely upon and you have not offered Wendyany help or pointed her in the correct direction in order to help her toundertake the massive task of undoing the injustice that she has suffered.

I am not stringing Wendy along and my advice and opinion onthis matter is not illegal. We all knowthat a serious wrong, an error of law has occurred here, I am simply trying tohelp Wendy through the process to put the matter right.

You are entitled to your opinion and free speech, as we allare, this is a privilasge that the CAG provides to all its members, as long as it does not contravene the Groups’rules, however, if you are going to make any further posts on this case, then Irespectfully ask that; a) you refrain from your defaming of my character andyour unfounded contentions as regards my posts here; and b) advise, clearly, that your opinion on this matter and my postis unqualified and merely your opinion, and c) post some positive advice orhelp for Wendy.

For the avoidance of any further doubt, this is not my areaof law, but I am recognised in the legal profession as an independentprofessional legal advisor and I amregulated and bound by the Institute of Paralegals rules and codes of conduct,therefore, I would not contravene the same and none of my posts here have doneso.

Please do not spoil this thread simply because you take noliking to me and any of the material I have posted here, which, as a matter oflaw, is 100% wholly factually correct in law based upon the circumstances ofthis case reported here by Wendy.

In a nut shell, if Wendy had the money, every solicitor orlaw firm worth their salt would be falling over themselves to take this case!

Kind regards

The Mould

 

 

:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:

[Desperate Daniella]

hope I did this ok I did it my self, let me know if its readable please x

!

 

 

I can't read it but I think it may be similar to another thread and I'll post a link in a minute.

[Desperate Daniella]

Thank you, the Mould,

 

Because if I am truly honest.... that's just how I felt regarding comments made early this morning, it put my whole day in a negative perspective of...

 

what I clearly believe, and you, and every one else seems to believe, in that I need justice because this is all so wrong, and if I had the money as you say, this case would be dealt with, and would be the one that sets a precedence for all the thousands of people who have already been wrong, or would be wronged by Lowell portfolio one, in taking these cases into the court arena were people like me do not stand a chance of fighting fairly and within the law!! XX

 

I am sorry you felt so negative. Yes, it would be great if you were taking them on with a solicitor, but having followed the advice The Mould has given on other threads which has helped a lot of people I really think he is doing a fantastic job for you too, and I know that you will be very glad he is here and on your side.

[Desperate Daniella]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?246845-Capital-1-CCA-Could-someone-check-if-enforceable-please

 

Have a look at this one to see if it is like yours.

 

Also, have a look at Pinky69's post No. 55.

 

DDx

[Desperate Daniella]

The link is working for me, so persevere.

 

It's pinky's post 55 on that thread that sets out why their default notices are invalid.

 

xx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

Try again in the morning. You must be shattered now.

 

Hope you get some sleep and hope The Mould does too.

 

Goodnight,

 

DDxx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

Glad you hear you are feeling more positive this morning, and great news about your income support.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

yes totaly agree they prey on the less fortunate and the most vulnerable people, but we have enough brain cells to know right from wrong ,so you cant give in to their underhanded dirty tactics or injustice will carry on .

i'm in a simular situation to wendyboats ,totaly understand and know the pressure n stress shes going through .its hard doing it alone,with all obstacles they put in ure way .not being able to rely or trust the legal proffession .CAG is a godsend for guidance. wendyboats being lucky enough to have great support from The Mould and DD . on which ive taken onboard to help my case. so a Big Thank You I wont give in we are all entitled for a fair hearing, best wishes xx

 

Hi Skyler,

 

I'm not an expert in this area - the Mould is the expert! - but if I can help at all please let me know.

 

I can't find your thread. If you post a link I'll have a look.

 

DDx

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi wendyboats,

 

Don't worry too much. The main thing is to get the whole thing set aside, then we can argue about the agreement.

 

Big hugs to you too. x