Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
    • Atsushi Katsuki tells the BBC the firm sees the sober generation as both a risk and an opportunity.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

MKDP Credit Report Entry


cheops
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3539 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

yea there you go then...

 

its welcome staff.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have spoken with welcome(FSCS) this morning and

 

they too cannot see where the £370 was credited back on loan 2

 

so they are logging it on there system as a complaint,

 

i will receive a letter confirming that shortly,

 

MKDP still own the loan and

 

what has happened is they have sent a letter to MDKP offsetting the amount they come up with as PPI calculation,

 

however it will no have to be done again as its wrong and should have included the £370 in the calculation.

 

As for the unfair charges, even though I have a signed for on royal mail it is not in the system and they are saying they have lost it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to question the FSCS authority to offset

to a debt buyer

 

the FOS website specifically details offsetting

nowhere does it say a reclaim can be paid to a debt buyer.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sent a message to the real FSCS not the Welcome Employed FSCS regarding this, I will let you know. Its all dodgy.

 

What do I do about the Unfair charges I sent off and they saying they haven't got it even though I have a signed for proof?

Link to post
Share on other sites

good work

 

that's welcome for you/

 

you could resend it I suppose but as its already signed for that incredible!!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have a log of everything not one detail missing.

 

I still don't trust them logging it on the system, I will be writing a formal letter to them signed for too.

 

It gets me how the FSCS can trust them to handle there own complaints, sounds like a right stitch up to me.

 

Is there any course of action for reclaiming Personal Accident Care and Life Care 24? This was added same as PPI?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah you should have lumped that in too

 

its all the same

 

even GAP/mechanical breakdowm/MIF/shortfall

 

whatever extras welcome added were simply insurance direct to their pocket

 

and they went bust

 

well, the directors ran off with everything.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd rehash the old claim

 

it should all be as one lump sum?

 

 

without gong back

 

is it listed on the statements payments sep from PPI

I expect its lumped I already?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the original PPI was calculated at £585.21 with Lifecare 24 and Personal Accident Plan it totals £955.21 without interest.

 

I have mentioned it in my dispute calculations letter as well as the the missing £376 and also the fact about the offsetting when the loan has been so called sold.

 

Posting in the morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from pat thread shere

 

when the FSCS get involved

 

ALL the insurance are normally or should be refunded

 

their remit is to put you back in the financial position 'as if'

any of the extras were never taken

then they calculate 90% of that figure

 

me thinks the FSCS are not keeping the thumb on welcome staff.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree, thats certainly the impression I get I think they are just trying it on.

 

The whole setup of the FSCS and Welcome just seems wrong to me and not impartial.

 

Thats why I wrote the real FSCS an email this afternoon. I might actually give them a call too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

 

Just an update on where we are with this.

 

I have received the CCA back from MKDP and looks correct but only for the refinanced loan which I guess is correct.

 

Now for the Welcome Side and the FSCS.

 

After contacting the 'Real' FSCS I am now in contact with someone directly who is looking into all this for me and have 3 seperate complaints he is 'overseeing'

 

1. Shortfall on the PPI calculation.

2. Offset issue as the loan was sold to MKDP.

3. The other 2 non-PPI insurance policies.(Lifecare 24 and Personal Accident Plan)

 

He has also re-assured me Welcome have now received the 'unfair' charges complaint.

 

So I now have another 4 complaints on the go :-o

 

Just wondering what MKDP's next move might be???

 

Will keep everyone updated.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another update.

 

I have had a response regarding the shortfall from the FSCS and the offset issue.

 

They are saying that welcome claim they evidence that it was applied to the account so no adjustment will be made as they can only go on what figures welcome give them.

 

However they said that welcome have to provide evidence that this has was done. So I phoned Welcome and they are saying that they no longer have the evidence so I have another complaint going regarding this.

 

As for the offset issue the loan was transferred for collection to 'mkdp' by way of 'interest' whatever that means? The debt is still owned by welcome.

 

What a complete and utter mess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh tying themselves up in knots here

 

the FSCS wont keep participating in this charade for long

and decide in your favour me thinks.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not according to the FSCS unfortunately

 

As I confirmed to you yesterday, if you believe the figures are incorrect you will need to pursue the issue with Welcome. We are entitled to rely on the figures they have given us. I am sorry that FSCS will not be able to pursue this matter on your behalf. I will also make Welcome aware of your issue.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another update.

 

I have had a response regarding the shortfall from the FSCS and the offset issue.

 

They are saying that welcome claim they evidence that it was applied to the account so no adjustment will be made as they can only go on what figures welcome give them.

 

However they said that welcome have to provide evidence that this has was done. So I phoned Welcome and they are saying that they no longer have the evidence so I have another complaint going regarding this.

 

As for the offset issue the loan was transferred for collection to 'mkdp' by way of 'interest' whatever that means? The debt is still owned by welcome.

 

What a complete and utter mess.

 

 

Sounds like a " profit sharing deal" you spoof the poor bugger into paying and we'll share the proceeds.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

while my complaints are being investigated by Welcome and FSCS

 

 

I am receiving letters from MKDP regarding getting into contact with them to sort a payment out!

 

How do I proceed with them at this stage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

send them a copy of one of the FSCS letters

that basically states your 'debt' is being investigated

and as such remains in dispute.

regarding the outstanding bal

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so MKDP have never replied to the CCA request?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sri for not looking back

am out at present.

 

 

so the only thing you've sent to MKDP is a CCA request

 

 

and basically since MKDP came on the scene some years previous

all they ever sent you is a series of threat-o-grams

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...