Hfo CCJ/CO now sold to LInk

[DonkeyB]

On it. What fun...

[riolto10]

On it. What fun...

 

Noticed 2 on witness statement I have blanked out date default notice date it reads 15th April 2005. 3.date is 27 Jan 2005 have I got it right barclaycard issued default notice two and a half months after it was assigned allegedly to hfo also I have a copy of a default notice from hfo saying date of default 22.09 .2005 !! any ideas what's going on here or is it me that's made a mistake

[DonkeyB]

riolto, do you live in Scotland?

[riolto10]

no its england i am affraid

[DonkeyB]

Can I ask why you sent HFO an SB letter?

[riolto10]

Can I ask why you sent HFO an SB letter?

 

Have just checked all my letters to them did not send them a sb letter sent them a account in dispute letter

 

Account no

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxx2010 the contents of which are noted

 

Your attention is drawn to the fact that this account is subject to a serious dispute. On xxxx 2010 I requested that you supply me a copy of the credit agreement covering this account pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78. To date you have failed to comply with my request. Without production of the said agreement I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable for any alleged debt to you nor does it give me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’ as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

If it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt I have included section 78(1) and 78(6) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which states…

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [£1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

 

Clearly as no agreement was supplied on request, this in no way complies with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and I now draw your attention to section 78 subsection 6 which states If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

Clearly this is a situation as described in S.78(6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the debt is unenforceable at this time. In addition, I draw your attention to section 127 (3) Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the consumer credit act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

 

To clarify S.61(1) states

 

(1)A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless—

 

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner, and

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms, and

© The document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signatureautolinker.com autolinking image, in such a state that all its terms are readily legible

 

In addition the prescribed terms referred to in section 60 CCA1974 are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following—

 

1.Number of repayments;

2.Amount of repayments;

3.Frequency and timing of repayments;

4.Dates of repayments;

5.The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

Therefore based upon the Consumer Credit Act 1974 this debt as it stands is unenforceable and should this proceed to litigation, a court is precluded from making an enforcement order under section 127(3) unless a true copy of the signed agreement is produced..

 

At the point where this account entered into the default situation as described in s78 (6) CCA 1974 no other charges are allowed to be added until such time as .you become compliant with my request. As yo are still not in compliance with my request I insist that the following takes place with immediate effect

 

 

All collection activities cease with immediate effect until you comply with my request fdate.9th July 2010 or such time as a court makes an enforcement order

In addition, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading guidance on debt collecting

 

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

What I Require.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If you are unable to supply the requested documentation because no such agreement is in existence I require written clarification as such.

 

I require that you comply with my request within 7 days of the date of this letter. I will not correspond any further with you until I either receive a copy of the requested documents as laid down in section 78(1) CCA 74 or clarification that such agreement doesn’t exist. I am advised that should you persist in pursuing this debt ignoring the above information you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well

 

No other correspondence will be accepted

 

Should you attempt litigation it will be vigorously defended and the failure to supply documentation under the CCA 1974 is a complete defence to any legal action and your actions will be vexatious and unlawful

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation,

[DonkeyB]

Wonder why it’s mentioned in the WS then? Weird...

[coledog]

Can I just confirm an earlier question riolto? Did they send any exhibits with the WS?

[riolto10]

Wonder why it’s mentioned in the WS then? Weird...

 

no idea statement is full of inacuracies

 

Can I just confirm an earlier question riolto? Did they send any exhibits with the WS?

 

hfo have sent me nothing had to request witness statement from the court who informed me that they dont generally do this it is up to hfo but they would send out a copy on this occasion I recevied this yesterday and posted it up for comments and to start my own witness statement

 

any comments on this=

 

Noticed 2 on witness statement I have blanked out date default notice date it reads 15th April 2005. 3.date is 27 Jan 2005 have I got it right barclaycard issued default notice two and a half months after it was assigned allegedly to hfo also I have a copy of a default notice from hfo saying date of default 22.09 .2005 !! any ideas what's going on here or is it me that's made a mistake

[coledog]

I would actually suggest that you write nicely to TR and even enclose a stamped addressed envelope (Big one with plenty of stamps although they have their own franking machine). Inform them that they have not sent you the WS and exhibits in relation to Claim xxx and request that they forward these by return of post.

 

Bloody cheek!

 

It is all evidence against them - keep a copy of the letter and send recorded

[riolto10]

will do this first thing monday read someware that they send these things out the day before so you dont have any time to digest them

[broken arrow]

will do this first thing monday read someware that they send these things out the day before so you dont have any time to digest them

I received mine the night before which did not give me time to respond, could do with seeing the exhibits as well.

[riolto10]

I received mine the night before which did not give me time to respond, could do with seeing the exhibits as well.

most of the exhibits I have got, mostly are letters the ones I need is the so called statues barred letter!! and the redacted sales agreement ( why redacted what about the orginal or a copy of the orginal ) will try the court for these

Broken arrow do you mind telling me about your experences with hfo and do you have a thread

[broken arrow]

Its a long read, but won in the end.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?144119-HFO-court-claim-**WON**&highlight=

[dadofholly]

no idea statement is full of inacuracies

 

I Dont believe that could be the case - with such a reputable comany like them?

[riolto10]

most of the exhibits I have got, mostly are letters the ones I need is the so called statues barred letter!! and the redacted sales agreement ( why redacted what about the orginal or a copy of the orginal ) will try the court for these

Broken arrow do you mind telling me about your experences with hfo and do you have a thread

Have read ba thread makes good reading in the end need help now with witness statements but need has in broken arrows points of law any ideas thanks

[broken arrow]

You need to chase Barclaycard up regarding who and when the account was sold, you can get them to confirm by email as well as post.

 

So once again the Roxburghe issue raises its head, could you post up the letter from Barclaycard removing personal info.

[riolto10]

So once again the Roxburghe issue raises its head, could you post up the letter from Barclaycard removing personal info.

thanks broken arrow please explain the effect this has on the claim it was bought by hfo and how to explain it in court

(Edit)

Edited February 2, 2011 by maroondevo52
Removed scan.

[broken arrow]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?245294-vjohn82-vs-HFO-Services-Limited-Part-Deux-**WON**&highlight=

 

I would read the thread I have posted, here is a little bit from the first post.

10. Barclaycard also confirm the account was sold on 04/05/2006 to Roxburghe UK Limited

 

11. This proves HFO Services/Capital have no legitimate right to pursue legal proceedings

 

 

 

From your WS

 

9. The Defendant contacted Barclaycard on the xx January 2011 and was informed the account was sold to a company called Roxburghe, on the 16th November 2005 and not HFO Capital (Ireland), therefore HFO Capital have no legal standing in this matter. The Defendant received a letter to confirm this on the 2nd February 2011 exhibit 4

[riolto10]

From your WS

 

9. The Defendant contacted Barclaycard on the xx January 2011 and was informed the account was sold to a company called Roxburghe, on the 16th November 2005 and not HFO Capital (Ireland), therefore HFO Capital have no legal standing in this matter. The Defendant received a letter to confirm this on the 2nd February 2011 exhibit 4

 

would doing any of this help ?

 

12. I send a Notice to Admit Facts again to HFO Services in January

 

13. HFO Services instruct Turnbull Rutherford to "discontinue" the claim in full for unspecified reasons

[maroondevo52]

Hi, riolto10.

 

I've removed your scan, your details were still readable, please re-post with them removed.

 

Thanks.

 

Scott.

[broken arrow]

Cheers maroondevo.

 

I would read VJ,s thread in full.

[riolto10]

Hi, riolto10.

 

I've removed your scan, your details were still readable, please re-post with them removed.

 

Thanks.

 

 

Thank you re scanned

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n604/riolto/scan0019.jpg

[coledog]

Good Evening Hot_Pipe - can you tell us your story?

 

Rioto

 

that letter is dynamite

[riolto10]

Rioto

 

that letter is dynamite

 

thanks coledog would be great to get a letter of discontinueation but feeling able to defend my case with everybodies help hope I can get my head round all the facts and explain it in plain english