Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 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

lloyds/carter claimform - HBOS OD debt - statute barred? ***Claim Discontinued***


Toonbaz
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3004 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

I am looking for some advice on a county court claim made by Bryan Carter on behalf of Lowells.

 

 

We are a certain as we can be that this default is statute barred.

 

 

There is no record of the account on credit file, the default has dropped off credit file, and no contact or payments have been made since 2008.

 

I've looked around and I am unsure if we go straight ahead and send our defence on that basis

or if we just acknowledge it at this point and make clear we will defend it all and go down route of requesting further information from Lowells

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, acknowledge the debt and you have extra time to get the defence together. Carter is known for issuing court cases like confetti and then dropping them if paperwork is demanded.

 

Use the CPR rules to get info from Lowells rather than an SAR as that would take too long.

 

Other more experienced people will be along soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes acknowledge and defend on basis of it being statute barred.

 

What type of debt is this ? If credit card or loan , send a CCA request to Lowells. You could send a CPR 31.14 to BC asking for any documents mentioned in their particulars of claim, but they won't provide them and will respond saying so. You could phone BC asking why they issued a claim on a statute barred debt and ask when they think a last payment was made. Record the phone call if you can. Ask them to confrim the payment details in writing.

 

If there is anyway of finding out the last payment from original creditors, it might be worth getting this confirmed in writing, just in case needed.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for quick replies. Im not sure what the debt is for. It would either be a credit card or an overdraft, there were three debts to same bank all of which should be statute barred. I have no idea which of those debts this amount relates to but it could only be a card or overdraft

Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as claim has been issued thread moved to financial legal issues please continue to post here

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Name of the Claimant - Lowell Portfolio Ltd

Date of issue – 11/08/15

Date of issue Friday 11th sept 4pm def deadline

 

What is the claim for

– the claimants claim is for the sum of £733.22, being monies due from the defendant to the claimant

under and agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 between the defendant

and HBOS PLC Under account reference xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and

assigned to the claimant on 07/08/12 notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

The defendant failed to maintain contractual repayment under the terms of the agreement

and a default notice has been served which has not been complied with.

And the claimant claims £733.22

 

The claimant also claims statutory interest pursuant to S.69 of the county act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment of the agreement to date but limited to a maximum of one year and a maximum of 1000 amounting to 58.66

 

What is the value of the claim? 791.88 plus fees and costs of 130

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account?

- Unsure, only debts to original creditor were for overdraft and credit card, debt would be one of these

 

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

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 has been purchased and claim is by the purchaser.

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?

Have received letters previously from Lowells so would assume on of those was a letter of assignment.

Never replied to any letters from Lowells

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Don't recall this but have moved several times and never updated address with Lowells

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ?

I believe so but most letters ignored and binned without much attention as thought

they were just fishing for a response knowing it was a statute barred debt

 

Why did you cease payments? Couldn't afford to keep up repayments

What was the date of your last payment? Unknown but likely to have been early 2008

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you think the debt is 100% statute barred

 

 

ack the debt on the MCOL website

defend all

leave juris unticked.

 

 

then exit mcol

you DONT need to request anymore time at all.

 

 

once that's done

go back to mcol and file this defence now:

nothing more needs doing

but you must be 100% sure its statute barred.

 

 

fill in the 2 bits needed and file it now:

 

 

 

The following defence is all you need if it is SB

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.

.

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

.

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

.

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

if they are stating its regulated by the CCA and giving a 16digit number

its the credit card not the OD.

 

 

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

Thanks for that and thanks for making my post more readable, posting on iPad and couldn't change colour!

 

I will check a little further tonight to ensure we are 100% sure of timeline. Pretty certain it's well over 6 years though which looks like it will make the defence a bit more straight forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

is that ref number on the claimform 16 digits?

 

 

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

is that ref number on the claimform 16 digits?

 

 

dx

 

No, 14 digits. My partner has just realised when we checked that it appears to be sort code and account number amalgamated together. That brings us to believe it relates to a £500 overdraft on that account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok no bother

thread title amended

 

 

same mo though

if you are certain its SB'd

file that defence now

not need to wait.

 

 

there would be no harm in ringing HBOS and asking

 

 

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

Does it matter if you go straight to defend claim without completing the acknowledgment of service? I seem to have skipped that step but haven't yet filed the defence, is it imperative that I complete AOS and if so can still go back to this step?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant read post 8 first

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

nope that's all

wont hurt to read a few threads here and in the successes forum mind.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?190-DCA-Legal-Successes

next move is the claimant

 

 

be SURE to come back here if you get anything.

be aware ofsilly phonecalls etc

neverever talk on the phone about you debts to anyone esp a dca!

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Bryan Carter letter arrived this morning

 

We are writing to formally confirm our Clients intention to proceed with this matter.

 

We will send notification to the court shortly but before we do so our client is prepared to enter into negotiations to try and achieve a solution whereby both parties avoid further costs and expenses, and if necessary to mediate. The Court encourages this type of negotiation between the parties.

 

Please contact our helpful team on 0345 8396166 to discuss how we can come to an arrangement by consent.

 

We recommend you seek independent legal advice.

 

We look forward to hearing from you

Link to post
Share on other sites

hows the SB investigation doing?

did you sort it and file the SB defence?

 

 

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

Yes, certain this is SB. moved house in October 2008 and know for certain I haven't paid or discussed this account with anyone since that date and probably for about 6 months prior to that also.

 

SB defence was filed straight away on MCOL on 13th august.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great next move is carters then and not silly letters

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

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 the letter from Carter's today I shouldn't respond to? I thought that was there next move following my defence.

 

'they will send notification to the court shortly but before we do so....'

 

so they havent decided yet to pay the fee to continue. maybe let them decide whether or not to do that first. if they do then it will go to questionnaire stage (unless there are any applications in the interim) where the courts mediation service can get involved. if they dont do anything within around 28 days then it will be auto stayed.

if sure is barred, then let them ponder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...