Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you Andy/Dx   UPDATED Defence, 3 days remaining.   Not sure where to mention invalid PAP. I put it under number 5. Please check if this is good to go.   Defence   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claims 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 allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) – failed to serve a letter of claim pre-claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   1. I have in the past had financial dealings with Lloyds Banking Group. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought clarity from the claimant.   2. However, I do not recall ever receiving a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.   3. I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.   4. I do not recall ever receiving a letter of assignment from the Lloyds Banking group advising the debt was assigned to the claimant.   5. Claimant served the invalid PAP with no connection to their court claim,   6. On receipt of this claim I sent CPR 31.14 and section 77 request. The claimant failed to provide a valid copy of the agreement and therefore remains in default of said request.   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 Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice/Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   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.      
    • no.   i wonder if the OP is entitled to CTAX benefit, thats only available from the relevant council...most on UC can get it..   but your MP is by far the most successful route to sorting these issues we've seen here to work.
    • dx100uk  unclebulgaria67   OP is on UC.   Could the council apply for weekly amounts to be deducted from UC claim ?
    • I suggest you start reading around this forum about the steps involved in taking a small claim in the County Court. It's very straightforward but you should understand the steps before embarking on it so that you are confident. We will help you all the way. Once you have done this basic reading then come back here and we can begin the process if you are happy to go ahead. On the basis of what you say, I expect that your chances are better than 90%. I also expect that West Cheshire Facilities Management will want to put their hands up before it goes to court and get a judgement against them. We would want to see your letter of claim before it sent off but I suggest that it is made clear that Social Security's have already been informed and that when you get a judgement against West Cheshire Facilities Management, you will make sure that social services and the health service generally are all circulated with copies of the judgement. If West Cheshire Facilities Management really want to take that risk with all of the reputational and business risk that accompanies it, then they are being extremely shortsighted.
  • 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

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2043 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

Hello again,

Sorry to resurrect this thread but I have one more question.

 

 

I am close to all my defaults dropping off my credit file after the 6 year period.

 

 

However, if I look at the "closed account" section it shows two debts which were sold on and marked as "satisfied" on 30 June 2012.

If you click on both of these it shows the default and the original amount outstanding at the time of default.

 

Is it correct that these will not disappear off my closed account section until 30 June 2018?

 

 

Will this have any impact on my credit approval once the defaults on my "open accounts" have vanished?

 

Any thoughts gratefully received.

All the best,

Chipmeister

Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK only you see closed accounts

 

 

so these debts are totally sep and not related to ones in the open section?

 

 

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
AFAIK only you see closed accounts

 

 

so these debts are totally sep and not related to ones in the open section?

 

 

dx

 

Thanks DX - good news about the closed accounts! The satisfied debts relate to debts sold on by MBNA. The new owner of the debts appears in my open section with the original default date of 31 March 2010 so those presumably will disappear on 31 March 2016?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The closed accounts that match open ones should have the same defaulted date

So will go on 6th bday of default

 

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 it's only the settled debts that disappear on the sixth anniversary of full payment, and the satisfied debts will disappear on the default anniversary rather than the date that the debt was sold on? Oh, happy days!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No any debt with a defaulted date

The. Whole account goes

 

Does not mean its not ness owed mind

 

As the ICO post states

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

as well as ccj's if there one there

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
AFAIK only you see closed accounts

 

 

 

Closed accounts stay on file for 6 years and can be seen by lenders.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...