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

[Ganymede]

I was if you remember on 19th Feb, given 7 days to serve papers by Judge Pursuing the Appeal file, which I did as asked ?? wendyxx

 

 

 

 

Please scan and post ALL Court Orders and letters received since your first appeal.

 

Thanks.

[Mike_hawk]

I was if you remember on 19th Feb, given 7 days to serve papers by Judge Pursuing the Appeal file, which I did as asked ?? wendyxx

 

Hi Wendy

 

It's not clear to me whether any witness evidence has previously been considered beyond your affi which the lower court appear to have rejected as out of time at the initial appeal stage.

 

As Gany notes, copies of notices/orders in chronological order may assist in unravelling how little (or much) evidence has previously been laid before the court.

 

Do you have a meeting set with the barrister to go over the papers yet? S/he should be in a position to advise on the strength of your case and which authority/ies would be relied upon in order to prepare. Bear in mind you will probably need to do much of the legwork, I wouldn't be inclined to give any of the alleged original creditors a moments peace until they present you with written responses to your data requests.

[The Mould]

That is good news for you Watson

Can you please confirm if the creditor served a valid statutory default notice on you pursuant to s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 (as amended) before he served the SD and then succeeded thereon with his bankruptcy petition against you.

If he did not, then the above section of the said statute provides that he was not entitled to proceed to enforce the debt he claimed that you owed him under the regulated agreement he relied upon in the SD.

I believe that if this is the case in your circumstances, then this fact on its own provides you with sufficient grounds to succeed with your request to the Court seeking an annulment of the bankruptcy Order, because; (your legal argument would be) the Courts cannot allow any creditor to succeed with enforcement action against his debtor in a money claim for a sum due under a regulated agreement – in contravention of the statutory provisions imposed upon him (the creditor).

Failure of a creditor to comply with the provisions imposed upon him under the relevant sections of the CCA 1974 (as amended), meant he was not entitled to proceed to enforce the regulated agreement he relied upon - the Court of Appeal confirmed this in its qualified judgment handed down in Brandon v American Express.

Godzilla old boy

Kind regards

The Mould

[The Mould]

Watson

At the hearing, I believe that your counsel ought to make representation requesting relief from any sanction previously imposed on you by the Court in this matter. He will know how to do this and be capable of stating the valid reasons for such (once you have furnished him with the full details of this matter).

Godzilla

Kind regards

The Mould

[wendyboats]

That is good news for you Watson

 

 

Can you please confirm if the creditor served a valid statutory default notice on you pursuant to s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 (as amended)beforehe served the SD and then succeeded thereon with his bankruptcy petition against you.

Mouldy do you mean the first creditors as in Capital one and mobile phones ? or do you mean Lowell's ?

Please advise me here so I can confirm or advise otherwise. WB

 

 

 

If he did not,then the above section of the said statute provides that he was not entitled to proceed to enforce the debt he claimed that you owed him under the regulated agreement he relied upon in the SD.

 

 

I believe that if this is the case in your circumstances, then this fact on its ownprovides you with sufficient grounds to succeed with your request to the Court seeking an annulment of the bankruptcy Order, because; (your legal argument would be) the Courts cannot allow any creditor to succeed with enforcement action against his debtor in a money claim for a sum due under a regulated agreement – in contravention of the statutory provisions imposed upon him (the creditor).

 

 

Failure of a creditor to comply with the provisions imposed upon him under the relevant sections of the CCA 1974 (as amended), meant he was not entitled to proceed to enforce the regulated agreement he relied upon -the Court of Appeal confirmed this in its qualified judgment handed down in Brandon v American Express.

 

 

Godzilla old boy

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

 

 

Mouldy please advise me here do you mean original creditors or Lowell after they brought them ? Sorry to be so dense here but I am confused as their are so many to consider! WB xx

[wendyboats]

Evening all ,

 

 

I have had problems with uploading court papers again, I will try again once more, then do by hand.

 

 

I am finishing off my skeleton case for Barrister to view, and need to get it perfect before sending so I do not incur costs for leaving out or putting details that are or are not needed.

 

 

I will update as soon as I can, Regards to all WB aka Watson x

[The Mould]

Mouldy please advise me here do you mean original creditors or Lowell after they brought them ? Sorry to be so dense here but I am confused as their are so many to consider! WB xx

 

 

 

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/2402.html

 

 

See the above case Watson; which confirms that an assignee of a regulated agreement is indeed a ‘creditor’ within the meaning of s.189 of the CCA 1974 (as amended).

 

Therefore, the provisions of the 1974 Act would indeed apply to Lowell, this means that Lowell were required to serve a valid statutory default notice on you before enforcing the credit agreement, if they did not, then not entitled to enforce.

 

If Lowell relied upon a default notice served by original creditor and that notice is bad, then, again, Lowell not entitled to enforce (and neither was the original creditor).

 

Godzilla Watson

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[wendyboats]

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/2402.html

 

 

See the above case Watson; which confirms that an assignee of a regulated agreement is indeed a ‘creditor’ within the meaning of s.189 of the CCA 1974 (as amended).

 

Therefore, the provisions of the 1974 Act would indeed apply to Lowell, this means that Lowell were required to serve a valid statutory default notice on you before enforcing the credit agreement, if they did not, then not entitled to enforce.

 

If Lowell relied upon a default notice served by original creditor and that notice is bad, then, again, Lowell not entitled to enforce (and neither was the original creditor).

 

Godzilla Watson

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

 

 

Sorry for late reply Mouldy,

 

 

I have been going over their evidence and they state as follows,

 

 

The rights and benefits of the first agreement were duly Assigned from Capital one by way of debt sale on 28th January 2011... £850.35.

 

 

Notice of Assignment served on bankrupt by respondent on 8th Feb 2011 in accordance with the provisions of section 136 of the law of property act 1925.

 

 

Notice of assignments on both mobiles also worded the same

 

 

Statutory demand...

 

 

Since notice of assignment was served on bankrupt, the respondent sent out lengthy correspondence requesting payment for the sums due and owing under the agreements.

 

 

Bankrupt warned intention to serve statutory demand, bankrupt served Sat demand by alternative service through letter box on 16th of Dec 2011.

 

 

I can see no mention of serving me with a valid Statutory default notice on any of the 3 debts prior to any of the above, and non have been given in evidence that I can find ?

 

 

I read link above Mouldy I hope this applies to my case, we know already that Capital ones Notice of default and Final Default notice were incorrect, so I hope you can confirm the above means another point of law to refer too !

 

 

Thank you Mouldy big hugs xxxxxxxxx Wendy aka Watson still on the case x

[Ganymede]

Evening all ,

 

 

I have had problems with uploading court papers again, I will try again once more, then do by hand.

 

 

I am finishing off my skeleton case for Barrister to view, and need to get it perfect before sending so I do not incur costs for leaving out or putting details that are or are not needed.

 

 

I will update as soon as I can, Regards to all WB aka Watson x

 

 

 

 

Hi Wendy how are you getting on with the scanning and uploading of the Orders?

[wendyboats]

Hi Wendy how are you getting on with the scanning and uploading of the Orders?

 

 

 

Morning Gany,

 

 

Have got side tracked a a bit, so sorry for delay will try again to upload, if not will type up in chronological order. Regards, Wendyx

[wendyboats]

26th of November received letter from Winchester courts informing me that His Honour Judge ....... has directed my file sent to Chancery Division for processing and hearing.

 

 

11TH December 2012 letter from Chancery Div, in London informing me to fill in form N161 (enclosed) and pay £235 to appeal bankruptcy order.

 

 

They have retained papers but will return to me if they do not hear back by 6TH January 2014.

 

 

Forms and bank giro of £235 fee sent recorded delivery 30TH of December 2013.

 

 

 

 

 

21st January 2014 letter sent to me from Chancery informing me appellants notice received.

 

 

The appeal has been allocated ref;........ Please use in all correspondence. This appeal will be handles in the high court Chancery appeals office.

 

 

We return copy of Appellants notice for your own record, together with sealed copies for service on Respondents. It is my responsibility to effect service on Respondents by first class post deemed to have been served two working days after posting.

 

 

Please send certificate of service as soon as possible, apply for transcript of lower court judgement if one exists.

 

 

I am sending your appeal to a judge at this stage and will send copies of order made.

 

 

31st January 2014 letter from court....My letter dated 27th January, and my remission form was incorrect find enclosed correct form and guidance notes.

 

 

Also please find enclosed application to apply for transcript at public expense.

 

I did all of above

 

 

17th April 014 letter from court Judge has considered my letter dated 25th Feb 2014 and noted that there has yet to be a Judgement of the lower court filed. He requests I make urgent enquiry's with Southampton court.

 

If one was not given forward a letter from office confirming such.

 

I did as asked and sent letter back recorded delivery that office stated no order

was their and all papers were sent to Winchester courts in November 2013.

Next court letter dated 17th April with court order dated 28th March 2014 Appellants application to extend time for appealing refused.

 

Hope you make sense of this ? I also noted that court letter have two different ref; numbers on the ones refusing appeal have CH/...... and Ones more positive have CC/.....?? WB X

[The Mould]

Sorry for late reply Mouldy,

 

 

I have been going over their evidence and they state as follows,

 

 

The rights and benefits of the first agreement were duly Assigned from Capital one by way of debt sale on 28th January 2011... £850.35.

 

 

Notice of Assignment served on bankrupt by respondent on 8th Feb 2011 in accordance with the provisions of section 136 of the law of property act 1925.

 

 

Notice of assignments on both mobiles also worded the same

 

 

Statutory demand...

 

 

Since notice of assignment was served on bankrupt, the respondent sent out lengthy correspondence requesting payment for the sums due and owing under the agreements.

 

 

Bankrupt warned intention to serve statutory demand, bankrupt served Sat demand by alternative service through letter box on 16th of Dec 2011.

 

 

I can see no mention of serving me with a valid Statutory default notice on any of the 3 debts prior to any of the above, and non have been given in evidence that I can find ?

 

 

I read link above Mouldy I hope this applies to my case, we know already that Capital ones Notice of default and Final Default notice were incorrect, so I hope you can confirm the above means another point of law to refer too !

 

 

Thank you Mouldy big hugs xxxxxxxxx Wendy aka Watson still on the case x "

 

 

 

 

Yes Watson my dear fellow

 

 

 

The above case – Link v Jones, provides you with an important and irrefutable point of law which you can rely upon as regards the circumstances of your case.

 

The said case confirms that Lowell, as the claimed assignee of the credit agreement,is a creditor within the meaning of s.189 CCA 1974 (as amended)therefore, he was under a statutory duty (s.87(1) CCA 74 as amended) to serve a valid default notice on you before he could become entitled to enforce the credit agreement.

 

As the original default notice served by the original creditor is defective, Lowell cannot rely upon the same and it does not matter how many letters they sent demanding payment,the fact that they had not earned entitlement under the statute (s.87(1) CCA 74) to enforce,will remain as irrefutable.

 

 

It is only the said point of law in the above case that is important and relevant to your case Watson the circumstances of the above case are not relevant to your argument(s)

 

See also the link below which sets out the legislation that be complied with in respect of service of a valid statutory default notice by a creditor on his before he can become entitled to proceed to enforce the credit agreement relied upon.

 

 

Go to link :-

 

 

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/part/VII

 

Godzilla

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Edited May 8, 2014 by Andyorch
Formatted & condensed

[unclebulgaria67]

The Mould

 

I would think the Judge would want evidence of a defective default notice issued by CapOne in regard to what you have said.

 

Would this be enough for a Judge to annull a bankruptcy and stop Wendy facing trustee in bankruptcy charges ? Hopefully the Barrister that acts for Wendy can put a case together. What troubles me more is the lack of documents that BW Legal/Lowells had at the time the bankruptcy petition was served. Surely a Judge would not think that it would be proper for any creditor to file bankruptcy against someone, when they are not in possession of relevant paperwork for the debt. There is no evidence that Wendy had these 2 mobile phone contracts. If they are found to belong to someone else, I suspect that BW Legal/Lowells would be in a spot of bother.

[The Mould]

The Mould

 

I would think the Judge would want evidence of a defective default notice issued by CapOne in regard to what you have said.

 

Would this be enough for a Judge to annull a bankruptcy and stop Wendy facing trustee in bankruptcy charges ? Hopefully the Barrister that acts for Wendy can put a case together. What troubles me more is the lack of documents that BW Legal/Lowells had at the time the bankruptcy petition was served. Surely a Judge would not think that it would be proper for any creditor to file bankruptcy against someone, when they are not in possession of relevant paperwork for the debt. There is no evidence that Wendy had these 2 mobile phone contracts. If they are found to belong to someone else, I suspect that BW Legal/Lowells would be in a spot of bother.

 

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1187.html

Good afternoon Uncle

Yes, the defective default notice is sufficient grounds to seek annulment of the bankruptcy order, because, the creditor – Lowell, was not entitled, by virtue of his failure to comply with s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended) to enforce the credit agreement by way of statutory demand nor indeed by any other means of enforcement proceedings.

Yes, the burden of proof in this matter is of course on Wendy as she is the applicant seeking said annulment.

The above Court of Appeal judgment (click on link) confirms that a creditor is not entitled to enforce a credit agreement in contravention of the statutory requirements imposed upon him under s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended).

Further, in Harrison v Link, the High Court also ruled that service of a valid default notice was a prerequisite to enforcement proceedings.

I do of course understand what you are saying Uncle as regards proof of matters pleaded and I agree with you, however, as shocking as it is, unfortunately, any action that is not opposed will succeed for the Claimant/Applicant and in Wendy’s case, sadly, she did not oppose the SD. Wendy has previously stated her numerous and valid reasons for this.

In order to succeed, Wendy must establish that at the time the bankruptcy order was made, it should not have been made. The non-compliant default notice clearly proves that Lowell were not entitled to proceed and succeed with their Statutory Demand to enforce the credit agreement, and so it follows that a conclusion that the creditor was not entitled by operation of law to enforce the credit agreement, compels a conclusion that the bankruptcy order which was made on the said Statutory Demand is bad in law and must be undone – annulled.

Godzilla Uncle

Kind regards

The Mould

[unclebulgaria67]

Bit unfair that an uncontested SD with possible inaccurate debt information cannot be considered by a court. These 2 mobile phone contacts might belong to Father Christmas.

 

I have a feeling that if the bankruptcy is annulled due to a faulty default notice, that the trustee in bankruptcy costs will stilll be live and kicking, with an argument about who is responsible for these. If BW Legal and Lowells did not have all the paperwork at the time they issued the SD and bankruptcy petition, the courts should look to them to meet all the costs.

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Wendy

 

Have you met with the barrister yet?

[SabreSheep]

Subscribed.

Keep going "Watson" If anyone here deserves justice it is you!

And I am amazed by the Mould and everyone else supporting you!

 

I almost wish I had seen this from the beginning, as I believe there would of been significant advantage in keeping a video diary. This is documentry worthy. *WHEN* you win your case I do hope you write your story and publisise it everywhere you can. You all deserve the recognition of the strength and courage that you have displayed in fighting these bullies. In my eyes they have taken advantage of your vulnerable position and exploited it to the max. It is about time someone started fighting for a "Wendys (Watsons) Law" to prevent DCAs from taking advantage of vulnerable claimants and revealing the dark arts they practice.

 

I can see it now. Panorama "Wendys Law and the battle against the DCA conspiracy"

 

If you have not managed or fail to get a barrister to take on the case, have you not tried asking any "Charities related to your condition" to see if they would be willing to take the case on for you? Its a very long shot but worth a go.

 

Its times like this I wish I had money to be able to donate to a CAG Fighting fund for fighting exceptional cases of injustice! XD

[wendyboats]

Subscribed.

Keep going "Watson" If anyone here deserves justice it is you!

And I am amazed by the Mould and everyone else supporting you!

 

I almost wish I had seen this from the beginning, as I believe there would of been significant advantage in keeping a video diary. This is documentry worthy. *WHEN* you win your case I do hope you write your story and publisise it everywhere you can. You all deserve the recognition of the strength and courage that you have displayed in fighting these bullies. In my eyes they have taken advantage of your vulnerable position and exploited it to the max. It is about time someone started fighting for a "Wendys (Watsons) Law" to prevent DCAs from taking advantage of vulnerable claimants and revealing the dark arts they practice.

 

I can see it now. Panorama "Wendys Law and the battle against the DCA conspiracy"

 

If you have not managed or fail to get a barrister to take on the case, have you not tried asking any "Charities related to your condition" to see if they would be willing to take the case on for you? Its a very long shot but worth a go.

 

Its times like this I wish I had money to be able to donate to a CAG Fighting fund for fighting exceptional cases of injustice! XD

 

 

Thank you for these kind words here much appreciated xx

[wendyboats]

Hi Wendy

 

Have you met with the barrister yet?

 

 

 

Hi Mike,

 

 

No not yet still looking into this case I will up date very soon xx

[wendyboats]

Afternoon all,

 

 

Still waiting to hear from Barrister, I will update as soon as I know anymore, just wanted to let you all know I am still around.

 

 

Kind regards WB aka Watson Still on the case xxx

[Ganymede]

How did you leave it with the Court?

 

Have you heard back since you wrote your last letter?

[Mike_hawk]

Gany

 

Wendy has been granted oral hearing , it's a final punt and hopefully the barrister engaged will have sourced a precedent case and advised wb of her position.

[SabreSheep]

bearing in mind how many screwups to "Watsons" Detriment, I do hope that the decision can be declared perverse some how. I also hope that if the worst happens another appeal even to Europe if need be can be arranged.

This cannot be allowed to stand :/

 

Hope the Mould is ok too

[Mike_hawk]

There's a presumption of proof within the insolvency regime which makes for great difficulty in the undoing of uncontested cases.

[Ganymede]

Any updates Wendy? Have you met with the barrister yet?