MKDP claimform +£10k Barclaycard 'debt' ***Claim Dismissed with Costs***

[victoria_siempre]

Hi and thanks cB

 

All communications have the flavour of a conditional assignment; I cannot communicate with BC by telephone to check anything because computer says ‘assigned to Compello – ‘phone them on...’ but I stress that I do not know for a fact. MK refuse to agree DQ by telephone but confirm they have no paperwork, are aggressive and state ‘you will have a CCJ against you’ because we have already paid the £400 court fee. Now, no logical entity would pursue a person at its own cost for that which that cannot pay and even MBNA (the penultimate nastiness) has not so done.

 

 

BC have rigged Libor, the FX exchange, and bankrupted small businesses via interest rate swaps but clearly have an appetite for more.

 

 

I merely pass this as experienced comment: my position remains as was; I do not negotiate with terrorists (Barclays).

 

 

x

 

 

v

[citizenB]

MK refuse to agree DQ by telephone but confirm they have no paperwork, are aggressive and state ‘you will have a CCJ against you’ because we have already paid the £400 court fee.

 

 

They are living on planet zog if they believe that just because they have paid the court fee, you will get a CCJ

[AndyOrch]

Makes them even more determined though as they can see their 10p in £1 investment beginning to dwindle...how dare you defend:wink:

[victoria_siempre]

Hi both

 

I think I'm OK at DEFCON4; I have proof of receipt of the unagreed DQ from CC and bandit; my defence is a very robust version of Andy's deny all; I have a briefed brief on standby to play charades on the day (he told me to use plenty of parentheses and square brackets when quoting case law), albeit that this would add to his costs by having to read them, notwithstanding that costs are recoverable in Fast track.

 

So, my point is, out of pure curiosity, who is behind MKbandit (Compello resonates with Cosa Nostra) because either Sarah has struck gold with the 'take all them all to court' business model or somebody with a deeper pocket is pulling her purse strings; I genuinely don't know, yet smell Barclays hand up her skirt; maybe DonkeyB (with his other hat on might shed light).

 

 

x

 

V

 

PS QED by:

 

http://www.ihatebarclays.co.uk/

Edited August 12, 2014 by victoria_siempre
Added info

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

Just an update to inform fellow victims.

 

I have a letter from Northampton allocating my case to my local court (entirely normal procedure) and to await their Direction. I remain at DEFCON4 and hope that this won't impact upon my luxury round the world cruise (this is joke by the way for Barclays bandits who may be watching).

 

x

 

v

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

This has now been tried and the court experience was very unthreatening and fair, but one needs to prepare; I found the following useful:

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZyb4HYC5A8

 

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Guidance/A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person.pdf

 

The result was ‘Case Dismissed’. + costs in my favour as LIP at fast track:

 

· Their case was slapdash (Judge’s words). They had no signed agreement and failed to meet court direction deadlines etc etc..

 

· The case involved MSDW – Goldfish – MKDP but MKDP did not realise this

 

· Nobody from MKDP attended but they were represented by a very polite but embarrassed solicitor

 

· My defence leant heavily on sec 61 and 127 - irredeemable unenforceability, acknowledging Carey but referring to Waksman re Carey and s. 127 – really an adaptation of DJ Manners judgement in Santander v Mayhew. I volunteered that I recalled that I had signed the application form which contained no terms or prescribed terms.

 

· My defence was CAG-standard deny all and my WS followed this line. By good fortune I included the bizarreness of MKDP’s reconstituted NoA which might have been reproduced by anyone with a word processor (Judge’s words). Critically, my sec78 request to MKDP in 2014 (2 years after the alleged NoA) was replied to by Barclays, on BC headed notepaper, whereas for their recon NoA they claimed that they did not have permission to use the BC headed paper!

 

· By good fortune, they had included the Deed of Assignment in the (very late) list of documents, claiming it was withheld because of privilege as a result of commercial confidentiality.

 

· The DJ was clearly ****ed off by the slapdash procedural behaviour but, I felt, wanted to avoid ruling on s.61 & s.127, although at no point did he criticise or contradict my argument.

 

· The case was dismissed on grounds of title. Their WS carried little weight, the NoA was suspect and the s. 78 response implied continued ownership by BC. The claimant had not proved on the basis of probability that they had title to this debt; yet, might have done quite simply by a redacted Deed of assignment or a simple letter from BC confirming the assignment to MKDP.

 

I hope this provides some small succour to fellow contestants in these Hunger Games.

 

love

 

vic

[slick132]

Great result VS and well done !!

 

[AndyOrch]

Well done...nice result Vic.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[victoria_siempre]

Thanks guys

 

I could not have done this without the great supportive learning experience that is CAG. Four ponies will be trotting CAG's way once the bandits stop smarting and I can smack my lips.

 

x

 

v

[slick132]

Four ponies will be trotting CAG's way once the bandits stop smarting and I can smack my lips.

 

As always, any donation will help us keep the Site running to help others.

 

[Spamalot]

Congratulations! I have the pleasure of fighting a similar battle with MKDP in a few weeks time, I hope my DJ proves to be as knowledgeable as yours.

 

Well done, Spam

[victoria_siempre]

Thanks Spam

 

DJ was not impressed by their flagrant disregard for CPR, court directions and absence in person...

 

Go get the bandits; and do submit a schedule of costs in advance LIP £19 p.h.

 

God bless

 

v

[citizenB]

This is great news, Victoria, well done

[ScarletPimpernel]

Well done VS. Good to see such a well-presented report on your day in court, too.

 

Hasta siempre!

[victoria_siempre]

Hi

 

We met before in canine-philia.

 

Sororal and fraternal greetings

 

I admit my coyness in I that lie ashamed to be unclothed for fear of ****ers of such stuff as Compello and Hoist (oh what a wondrous place must Guernsey be to have such people astride it).

 

I am very old school, aka ‘tankies’, and have a pictogram of my three year old son in rouge braces dancing with an elderly French women with a black man to the tune of the Internationale at the Fête de l'Humanité; I love the Fête and heard Leonard Cohen there whilst we staffed the Australian CP stand against French nuclear testing. The Party slogan at the time was ‘Je suis Communiste, pourqoui pas vouz? (My compatriot responded, ‘Parce que,”Je suis un fascist”), thereby displaying a superior British sense of humor: we fell asleep drunk.

 

Yes, Hasta siempre sans Comandantee; the only Jihad is within yourself.

 

x

 

v