Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • well be careful if the debt is above £600 you could have HCEO bailiffs at your  and for the want of logging onto MCOL and typing just as your are here  - it could all be simply sorted.   dx      
    • well they do have an alternate, do nothing.   I cant see a past thread on this? why didn't you come here and ask for advice first?   all your threads have a nasty trait you still haven't got out of and that's blindly contacting DCA's    you have never earned above the threshold you should have simply sent a new SLC deferment form.   in a way I think you've paid this money under duress when you had no need too.        
    • Interestingly I've just had another alert on my Clear Score report:   Upcoming Updates A new credit or store card will be added to your January report. Organisation Name: BAIA0090 Account Number: ****9048 Company Type: finance house What does this mean? This could mean that you’ve recently opened a new account, or it might be because a lender has just shared some information relating to an old account. Why is this change not on my report yet? We get your credit report every month from Equifax, a credit reference agency. This update can be seen on your Equifax credit report now but will only be reflected in your ClearScore report when your report is next updated, which is on 2 January. If you apply for credit now, lenders will see this update on your Equifax credit report. Now, this looks very much as if Hoist have taken my agreement off and transferred it to whoever BAIA0090 are.  I've not seen any new notice of assignement or anything.  
    • Sorry i am Not putting details in here. This bank i did have an account with in 1993. That is the last time i used them.   I am going to let them ccj me.   I am not going to even think about this any more. My bin will get the letters and my door will be ignored.   Thank you for the interest but i will waste time for another 6 odd years while i get my mind right All the best
    • Particulars of Claim (for Reference - not to be submitted with defence)   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 1.The Claim is for the sum of £2722 arising from the Defendant's breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement referenced Under no xxxxxxxxxxxx   2.The Defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a Default Notice issued pursuant to ss.87(1) and 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.   3.The Claimant claims the sums due from the Defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd (EX BARCLAYCARD) Written notice of the assignment has been given. The Claimant claims 1.The sum of £2792 2. Costs 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.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. 3. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.   4. Paragraph 2 is denied .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   5.Paragraph 3  is denied.I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .   6. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.   7. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.  To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .   8.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   10. 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 crediticon Act 1974.6.   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. (Defence mainly taken straight from Micky the Hippo's similar defence)
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1793 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

Im going through an issue with work. Im finding the union is a little laid back. Nothing too major yet, but they're very reticent regarding action.

 

Im a little worried they might be weak in the face of my Tribunal (They're the same ones who work with employees of a company which rhymes with 'Besco')

I've been so worried ,I've approached a private company who do work on a 'fixed fee' basis. I can afford to go down the fixed fee route. I want to make sure my ex-employer really isn't left off the hook.

 

Would anyone recommend a best route? Its the first time I've ever done this in 25 years of work. Im not asking for definitives, but in the face of an ineffectual union ,but with unlimited access to legal cover, or go for a fixed fee from a firm which I'll be the main focus ie. they'll be working directly for me.

 

Are union legal cover as effective as paid private action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say, given the choice, it's probably better to go with a solicitor of your choice.

 

In my experience, unions will either conduct the work in house, send the work to a referral team of semi qualified paralegals who keep the work in house there, or refer it to their panel solicitors who generally do the work for a low fixed amount.

 

A no win no fee qualified solicitor will be more likely to work hard on the case, in my opinion. They need to get the right result to get paid for the job!

 

The other option is to see if you have legal expenses insurance under your household contents insurance policy - in which case you could invoke your right to freedom of choice and find a reputable firm.

 

It's a matter of personal choice though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take advantage of the legal plus if it's more of a legal issue which your membership covers and take it from there.


All information given above is purely my own opinion. Some based on personal experience. Where backed up by case files I will make that known. However, until then please take all of what I say with a pinch of salt and accept it only as a reference. :madgrin::madgrin::madgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might edit your post Bill... calling company into disrepute when looking at your whole posting history, and so on....


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant call legal plus as it has to go through the rep first. :( Or he'd say 'why did you do that? I was dealing with it'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most companies will use tactics we don't like. Highlighting that in my opinion does not meen your bringing them into disrepute. However point taken and post edited.

 

Bill


All information given above is purely my own opinion. Some based on personal experience. Where backed up by case files I will make that known. However, until then please take all of what I say with a pinch of salt and accept it only as a reference. :madgrin::madgrin::madgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

use the union. Get a full time regional officer involved rather than your local reps. Contact head office if the branch wont get off their backsides to help. The legal help will cost you nothing via the union and their solicitors are better than any no-win no fee people, trust me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers EB!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...