Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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/Barclaycard claim form


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3496 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

Greetings all

 

Following a lot of reading here,

the following is my current state of play with a claim received from MKDP LLP.

 

At the end is my proposed Defence to the Court.

 

Name of the Claimant ?MKDP LLP

Date of issue – 26th June 2014

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

Please type out their particulars of claim (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down.

 

What is the value of the claim? £8410

 

Is the claim for a current or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Old credit card

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? 1980s

 

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. Debt purchaser

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not sure

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No

 

Why did you cease payments:- Change of circumstances

 

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

 

 

Amount claimed £8000

Court fee £410

Total amount £8410

 

Particulars of claim

The claimant claims the sum of 8000 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant

under a regulated agreement originally between the Defendant and Barclaycard.

 

The Defendant’s account number was XXXX and was assigned to the claimant on XX/XX/2011,

notice of this has been given to the Defendant.

 

The defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement

and a default notice has been served pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The Claimant claims the sum of 8000 and costs.

 

The Claimant has complied, as far as is necessary, with the pre-action conduct practice direction.

 

I acknowledged service on 14th July.

 

CCa sent

 

My CPR request:

14th July 2014

 

 

 

1: the agreement.

2: the assignment

 

3: the default notice

 

4: the termination notice

 

5: statement of account

 

Their response:

 

We write with reference to your recent request to inspect the documents referred to in our statement of case under CPR 31.14.

 

Unfortunately at this time we are unable to fulfil your request and as such we will need to liaise with the original lender

to request the appropriate documents.

 

We will forward these to you upon receipt but this may take up to 8 weeks.

 

We draw your attention to the fact that this claim is for a balance less than £10,000

and the normal track will be the small claims track which is governed by the Rules and Practice Directions of CPR 27.

 

This means that Part 31 of the Rules is not applicable to your claim pursuant to CPR 27.2(1)(b) and CPR 31.1(2).

 

It is not our intention to obstruct proceedings, on the contrary it is our view that the early disclosure of documents assist in reaching settlement.

 

It is also worth noting that we are required to serve on you and the Court copies of all documents upon which we intend to rely

at least 14 days prior to any date fixed for a final hearing in order to substantiate our claim and in compliance with CPR 27.4.

 

Please note that now that a claim has been issued it is your responsibility to file a response

and we may enter judgement if an Acknowledgement of Service or Defence is not filed at the appropriate time.

 

For the avoidance of doubt it is our contention that you are in a position whereby you can respond to the claim form

to the extent that you can admit or deny both liability and quantum without sight of any documents.

 

My proposed defence to be filed:

 

 

1.The claimant claims the sum of ****.** being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement originally between the defendant and Barclaycard.

 

2.The Defendant's account number was **************** and was assigned to the Claimant on XXXXXX, notice of this has been provided to the Defendant.

 

3.The Defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

4.The Claimant claims the sum of ****.** and costs.

The Claimant has complied, as far as is necessary, with the pre-action conduct practice direction.

 

 

 

Defence

 

 

 

 

1. Paragraph 1 is neither admitted nor denied with regards to the Defendant entering in to an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim. Until such time the claimant can comply with my section 78 request and CPR 31.14 the claimant is prevented from enforcing any agreements or seeking any relief.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied that any notice of assignment – as required by section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and by section 82a of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – was received on or after 17/9/2012.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied that any statutory and valid default notice has been served on the Defendant.

 

4. Paragraph 4 is denied the claimant has complied with any pre action protocol and has yet to respond to my requests for clarification.

It is denied the Defendant owes any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

(a) Show how the defendant has entered into the agreements

(b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for

© Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim by way of a Notice of Assignment and evidence of its service

On receipt of the claim form the Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request dated xxxxxx for a copy of the notice of assignment, default notice and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached, which form the basis of this claim.

This was signed for by the claimants solicitors on xxxxxxxxx. The claimant has yet to comply.

 

On receipt of this claim form the Defendant requested a copy of the credit card agreement by way of a section 78 request dated xxxxxxxx. The Claimant has yet to comply.

 

Therefore the claimant in their non-compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim and against pre action protocol should be considered when the question of costs arise.

5. As per Civil Procedure rule 16.5(4) I expect that the claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

6. On the alternative, if 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.

 

7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

Is this appropriate as a filing?

 

Thanks to all who have contributed and have let me get this far.

 

I hope I haven't yet made any blunders.Any other guidance greatly appreciated,

 

please just let me know if I am good to go with the above.

Edited by dx100uk
post tidied & templates removed - please do not post templates in the open forum - dx
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also just checked on the Experian website, and the date of default is under four months before the debt was allegedly reassigned.

 

Also, as of today, they have added the £410 court fee to the default balance.

 

I'd really appreciate some help here, please!

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to file by tomorrow Monday midnight.

 

i'll alert the team

 

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

who are the sols please

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

Thanks DK

Claimant and sols are MKDP LLP

br

 

mkdp are not sols

who are the claimants sols please

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

Defence is good to go dogilvy78

 

Your thread is exemplary..well laid out...good research.......you seem to have have a good grasp of the process.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

Dont forget to print proof of defence submission and retain.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

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

Thanks Andy.

It's all down to this wonderfully empowering forum, not least yourself and DX.

I'll post my defence first thing tomorrow and keep the Caggers updated. (Why does the spell checker insist on defense? NFL no doubt.)

Nighty night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's you spell checker not ours

 

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

thx both

I guess from DX's question that MKPD haven't claimed as as sols before?

I'll confirm defence am.

fwiw, the restriction on 10 posts before you can PM can make things fraught.

ttfn

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you don't need PM

it only opens you up to people trying to fleece and charge you

which is why we did it.

 

you can still PM siteteam mind

 

dx

 

 

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

Defense is preferred in American English, and defence is preferred in all other main varieties of English, including Australian, British, and Canadian English.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

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

thx both

I guess from DX's question that MKPD haven't claimed as as sols before?

I'll confirm defence am.

fwiw, the restriction on 10 posts before you can PM can make things fraught.

ttfn

 

I have an ongoing one with MKDP at the moment, and there were no solicitor's details listed, just the same address for them in Milton Keynes, so have just sent all documents to that address.

 

My guess is that to keep costs down they do everything in house, in the hope that they get default judgments with a % of filings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Okay, I've had the a copy of the original agreement back via MKDP.

 

It is my signature on the form but the other printed details are unreadable, a

nd the were no full T&Cs sent.

Agreement from early 80s.

 

I have scanned it and was just redacting it when I noticed there have been changes made to the address not in my handwriting.

 

Therefore, the form as completed by me has been altered.

 

It was never went back for me to correct because it has been done in someone else's handwriting.

 

Should I still carry on redacting and post the form, or does this change the complexion of things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so wheres the agreement and the terms and conditions?

 

that's an application form

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

Hi DX

That's all they sent me.

Do I write to them asking for the agreement as per my CCA request?

Or does this constitute their failure to comply?

 

Their letter:

 

MKDP LLC v Yourself

Claim Number: XXXXXXXXX

 

We write with reference to the matter above.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of the signed application form relating to this outstanding balance which confirms you are liable for the outstanding amount.

 

If you wish to discuss this matter further please contact our legal department on 0800 XXX XXXX. Please be advised, should this matter proceed to trial and you are unsuccessful you may be liable for our costs.

 

I really don't appreciate their attempt at a threatening tone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you've filed your defence

 

if they wanna go back to court with that

 

then good luck MKDP!!

 

i'll let andy comment.

 

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

Could you please repost the agreement in pdf format.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

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...