Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3133 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

Those of you that happen to have the Enforcement Agent (EA) and demanding money to clear your debt you really should get to grips with what is a must on these forms, and what happens if you cannot keep to the agreement...

 

 

Please have a read here as it could help you understand CLEARLY what could happen in this case for the link it is here https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/bailiffs/bailiff-has-issued-you-with-a-notice/bailiffs-notices/controlled-goods-agreements-bailiffs/

 

 

As you can see the EA MUST follow a strict regime before a CGA is correct....

 

 

The link has visual forms that you can read now and get to grips with it. Most of all the person signing it must either be you or someone the has your PERMISSION to do so. Whether or not the EA believes that the 3rd party has a verbal agreement that they can sign for you, it does not state that this needs to be in writing, this could cause issues if the other person is your partner. So maybe consider not giving your permission in the first place then the CGA will be void if a 3rd party signs it without permission...

 

 

Finally this

 

 

If a Controlled good agreement doesn't keep to the rules

 

If a controlled goods agreement doesn't keep to these rules, the bailiff won't have control of your belongings and you can do the following:

 

  • refuse to let the bailiff in if they try to come back – they won’t be allowed to force their way in
  • write to the bailiff firm to explain that you will not be making any payments under the controlled goods agreement because it isn’t valid
  • take the bailiff firm to court to get your belongings back, if they've already been taken.

If you’re given a controlled goods agreement that doesn’t keep to the rules, this can give you more time to look at other options to stop the bailiff action, such as:

 

  • negotiating with your creditors to pay back what you owe
  • applying to the court to suspend the bailiff action
  • choosing a formal debt solution, such as a debt relief order or bankruptcy.

Please spend time reading all of the links within the original link it will be of use to you in the long run...

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please have a read here as it could help you understand CLEARLY what could happen in this case for the link it is here https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/bailiffs/bailiff-has-issued-you-with-a-notice/bailiffs-notices/controlled-goods-agreements-bailiffs/

 

 

If a Controlled good agreement doesn't keep to the rules

 

If a controlled goods agreement doesn't keep to these rules, the bailiff won't have control of your belongings and you can do the following:

 

  • refuse to let the bailiff in if they try to come back – they won’t be allowed to force their way in
  • write to the bailiff firm to explain that you will not be making any payments under the controlled goods agreement because it isn’t valid
  • take the bailiff firm to court to get your belongings back, if they've already been taken.

 

An important subject and one that is greatly misunderstood.

 

Whilst I FULLY SUPPORT the work of Citizen's Advice, there are days when I do despair of the advice that they provide. Today is one such day.

 

If a debtor does not consider that a CGA has been properly set up then surely the correct course of action should be to raise a compaint with the creditor (in most cases the local authority), After all, it is the creditor who is wholly responsible for any wrongdoing by their agent.

 

Secondly, I am surprised at the advice given to 'take the bailiff firm to court' (to get belongings back..if they have been taken). Court action should ALWAYS be a last resort and if there is a dispute about goods taken, the correct course of action is to make representation under CPR 85. Thirdly, a debtor should NEVER take a bailiff firm to court. If court action were ever necessary, any claim should be against the creditor (local authority) and not the bailiff firm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is of concern hence why I posted the links, even though the CAB are good at some things they get it wrong or incomplete. One of my main concerns if these people get it wrong there is really something wrong with the advice that is being touted by a professional company. So what chance has a normal every day person got at getting it right first time ALL of the time.

 

 

Maybe someone should point this error out to the CAB and have it rectified before some poor soul loses a fortune that they cannot afford in the first place.. As far as some of the advice that is correct they really need to sort this out ASAP...

 

 

Yes the EA must make sure the correct information is always entered into the forms, but then saying what they did will cause heartache will it not? As this is advice going against what is supposed to be right!

 

 

But what can one do?

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally I have posted correctly as far as the forms go but where can we stop pointing in the direction that is actually supposed to help the debtor... When they get it wrong?

 

 

Maybe someone with some authority on this subject should approach them and inform them of their content on this particular matter? Not me I am afraid...

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please have a read here as it could help you understand CLEARLY what could happen in this case for the link it is here https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/bailiffs/bailiff-has-issued-you-with-a-notice/bailiffs-notices/controlled-goods-agreements-bailiffs/

 

 

If a Controlled good agreement doesn't keep to the rules

 

If you’re given a controlled goods agreement that doesn’t keep to the rules, this can give you more time to look at other options to stop the bailiff action, such as:

 

  • negotiating with your creditors to pay back what you owe
  • applying to the court to suspend the bailiff action
  • choosing a formal debt solution, such as a debt relief order or bankruptcy.

.

 

I have concerns too about the above advice.

 

In the vast majority of cases a Controlled Goods Agreement will be in relation to a Liability Order for arrears of council tax. Very rarely do we find a CGA for road traffic debts. Unless the debt is in relation to a CCJ enforced via the High Court there is NO facility whatsoever that allows for a debtor to apply to the court to suspend bailiff action!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What if as you say they are getting confused with HCEO's and other EA's then this is seriously conflicting advice. Either way it could get dreadful very quickly.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all is this thread worrying and should it be removed due to incorrect advice by the CAB? It is going to be very hard to split their advice into a good thread due to the advice and links within their page what to do?

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all is this thread worrying and should it be removed due to incorrect advice by the CAB?

 

No, not at all.

 

You will come across different opinions at all times and it varies from agency to agency. The regulations have only been in place for just 18 months and everyone is entitled to their own interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...