Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, I think UK will get same deal as EU.  Main reasons for this are two sectors,  Defence and Financial Services.  US have huge levels of money invested in the UK, so they have a self interest in offering a trade deal as good as the EU.
    • @labrat I'll bet it isn't the subframe itself that's broken. It'll be the subframe mounting bolt(s) that have sheared off inside it. Because the bolt is seized inside the subframe, it effectively renders the subframe scrap. I suspect the garage are simply talking in terms the average customer is more likely to understand than going into the detail of it. The Golf, Jetta and Beetle, which are all mechanically identical, are notorious for it.    A smaller independent garage may have tried to get the bolts out, but you very quickly reach the point where time/effort/cost is simply not worth it and replacement of the whole subframe is the better choice.   Of course the OP could approach a salvage yard, either local or online, and ask about the cost of a good used item, which would be substantially less expensive than what I assume is the price VW are charging for a replacement.
    • Applied for and awarded by BY in Sept 2020 still not received it yet Comments appreciated
    • Hi Slick   I am not as experienced as you is there any thing in sar that i can identify. It does not state £2.5k debt in sar. It mentions new add ons.
    • So long story short.   I had a number of re-occurring loans with Unclebuck, I made a complaint in regards to my latest one back in 2019, got to an agreement to remove default markings and charges etc and just pay the principal. Didn't pay the outstanding amount due to personal reasons, being put on Furlough was one of them.   Saw that Unclebuck went into administration, made a redress application a couple of weeks ago, got awarded £807 for previous loans (not the latest one). So I contacted the administration to confirm they would pay the redress amount towards my outstanding balance, but they said they cannot do so?   How is that fair? I get they they can't pay me any cash, but surely they should be able to write off the current outstanding amount, it has to work both ways right? This was the latest response I got, so far no reply from their solicitor yet.   "Whilst I note your comments concerning your desire to set off Redress due in respect of unaffordable loans against your current loan that was not eligible for Redress, unfortunately the Administration precludes the position of set off until the Administrator makes a declaration under Rule 14.29 of the Insolvency Rules 2016. This declaration has not been made by the Administrators and will not be made as there is no distribution or intended dividend to be made to creditors in this particular Administration. Whilst I sympathise with your position, you will appreciate that the Administrators are governed by statute and cannot contract out of it.   I promise to speak to our solicitors to see if there is any room for manoeuvre on this matter and will come back to you afterwards, however I feel that it is unlikely. As you will appreciate making an exception for you may open the Administrators to claims from other customers in a similar position to yourself and indeed from other customers that do not have the benefit of another loan to set their Redress off against."   And to further add to it, I got an email today saying they transferred the loan to a collection field agency "Conexus Recovery and Field Services Ltd "  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

AKTIV KAPITAL Claimform old MBNA CC 'debt'

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2419 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi all, j

ust received a claim for an old disputed CC and

having not looked at the forum for a while could do with some up to date help.


Details as follows



Date of Issue: 13th May 2014.

Acknowledge by (+19 Days): Sunday 1st June 2014

Defence By (33 Days) : Saturday 14th June 2014


Paticulars of Claim:

The claimant claims the sum of 3,827 for debt and interest.


On 21/05/2005 the defendant entered into an agreement with MBNA for a credit card under reference XXXXX.


On 31/08/2009 the defendant defaulted on the agreement with an outstanding balance of 3,258.


On 22/09/09 the debt of 3,257 was assigned to Varde Investments (Ireland) Ltd,

who itself assigned the debt to Aktiv Kapital Portfolio AS Zug branch on 03/03/12.


Notices of Assignment were sent to the defendant in accordance with s136 Law of Property Act 1925.



1. The sum of 3,257

2. Statutory interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% per annum

from 3/3/12 to 12/5/14 571, & thereafter at a daily rate OF 0.71 until judgement or sooner payment


Amount Claimed : 3828

Court Fee : 185

Solicitors Cost : 80

Total : 4093


The claim is for an old credit card account started in 2005.


Only received the first notice of assignment when requested, a letter from MBNA saying debt was assigned.


Received a letter from Akticv capital on 9/3/12 to state they had purchased debt but no confirmation from Varde Investments.


Default notice from original creditor dated 9th September 2009.

It claimed payment of full amount rather than arrears

so sent a formal complaint to MBNA dated 10th October 2009

stating they had unlawfully terminated the agreement

and I viewed the agreement as terminated as of 7th September 2009.


Have not received any notices of default sums,


received a notice of arrears 27/10/11 from Varde and initially a notice of sums in arrears from MBNA dated July 15 2009.


Having agreed to token payments and had interest frozen

ceased payments following invalid default dated 9th September 2009.


To date have received no response from MBNA regarding this letter.

The dispute therefore is ongoing.




Signed up for this card at a football match and the application was filled in by the agent.


Initial letter from MBNA states the agreement signed complies with previous regulations not current.


Does that make it unenforceable as not compliant with regulations at the time.


Anyway any more info or copies of documents I am happy to help and hope the good people of CAG can help me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi myboro


If you could read and complete the following not already provided above to assist in advising you further.







We could do with some help from you.



 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 thought I had included all the info in the post and would appreciate any help anyone can give.

Paticularly regards embarrased defence while awaiting documents. Then think its on an unenforceable agreement and dodgy DN but only time will see.


Did raise the dispute with MBNA origionally but they just sold the debt, raised with DCA and told them date of dispute they then sold it again !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you done a cca request, and now a CPR 31.14 request (is small claims re cpr, but worth a try)?

do a 'normal' defence (rather than an 'embarrassed' one) when/if the time comes, the issues can still be mentioned in defence. have a read round similar recent threads, see eg's of defences used. stick to court deadlines.

any missold ppi?




Link to post
Share on other sites

Also do you have your statements and how much int he way of penalty charges are on there. If theres time someone migthbe able to help you out with a counter claim.


If not you will want to SAR the OC and get everything so you can prepare a claim for unlawfull penalty charges and interest in restitution that may further reduce the balance.








The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we don't recommend using the embarrassed defence route anymore



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
  • 1 month later...

Hi All,


Ok defence went in fairly standard denial and asked for stricktest proof of claim. Agreement received but how do I request the origional be produced for court. The agreement was signed in 2005 and received a letter from MBNA with card which stated

"New Consumer Credit regulations governing the form and content of your agreement have been introduced recently. If the agreement you signed complied with previous regulations, the layout of this copy of the terms and conditions will appear diffrent as they have been changed to the layout of the new regulations."


Seems importasnt to push for the origional agreement anyone any idea how to do this. Allocation questionaire due on 17th is it possible to do this now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to your PM.


If your defence put the claimant to strict proof to disclose the agreement and you have been allocated with directions....then they must disclose the original agreement.This disclosure was it of their own accord or the courts?



We could do with some help from you.



 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 and thanks,


defence stated

As to the first sentence of Claimant’s statement of case; It is agreed that I entered into the agreement on the 21st May 2005 as stated in the Claimant’s statement of case. It is denied that the agreement complies with s.61 of the CCA Act 1974 (as amended) and the Claimant is put to the strictest of proof in establishing the contrary of my contention as to this element of his claim


Have received a copy of the agreement, but they just attach terms and conditions. Is it possible to request the origional at this stage. Currently need to complete Small Claims Directions Questionnaire and wondered if draft directions were the way to go.


Thanks for all your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court should direct disclosure of the original with their directions......you cant issue directions on SCT.

We could do with some help from you.



 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...