Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

BARCLAYCARD - FILED DEFENCE -advice


stuflo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6290 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

After issuing my Moneyclaim - Barclaycard then took 12 days to acknowledge the claim - the had to wait another 14 days before I could enter Judgement - just been online to do it and low and behold they have filed a Defence at the last minute disputing the total amount and I understand it will now be transferred to a local County Court - aaarrrggh!! Barclaycard are driving me maddd!! Delaying tactics all along. I sincerely hope they pay up before it gets to Court - why do they do this if they have no intention of going to Court - would it not be better just to pay up well before and save costs - can anyone put my mind at rest here please - I also have another claim again MINT which is through Moneyclaim - I hope that I can get to Tuesday to enter Judgement on that before they acknowledge. Here's hoping one goes my way!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They will take it to the wire. The whole point is to make you lose your nerve and abandon the case. Don't give up! Just stick to your guns and make sure you prepare everything for the court hearing. I doubt very much whether they will actually turn up in court but they may settle at the last minute or fail to turn up in court - in which case you win by default - although (and correct me if I'm mistaken) you will still have to turn up at court.

_________________________________________

Alliance & Leicester MBNA Credit Card

Data Protection Act letter sent 3 July 2006.

Incomplete list of charges received 12 August 2006

Requested repayment of charges 10 November 2006

LBA sent 24 November 2006

Estimated £4650 in fines and interest.

Barclaycard

Data Protection Act letter sent 3 July 2006.

Incomplete statements sent 9 July 2006

Requested repayment of charges 14 August 2006

LBA sent 30 August 2006

Estimated £468 in fines and interest.

Initiated claim at MCOL 20 September 2006

Claiming £615.47 including fines & interest, s69 interest and costs

Claim acknowledged 10 October 2006

Defence filed 20 October 2006

Settled in full £640 total. 14 December 2006

Vodafone

Requested Default Notice removed 10 July 2006

Received letter agreeing to request 10 August 2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Roydoson for the advice - sincerely hope you are right - I know thats the risk you take in issuing - just nervous about the whole Court process.

Kendraflo:confused:

 

Halifax - S.A.R 8/9/06 - Overdraft facility removed 21/9/06 - threat to close account - Default Notice lodged 06.10.06

Mint - S.A.R - 8/9/06 - Statements received 03.10.06 - Prelim letter sent for £268.13 03.10.06

First Direct - S.A.R 8/9/06 - Statements received 21/9/06 - Prelim letter sent 21/9/06 for £410.00 - settled in full

First Direct - S.A.R 21/9/06 - for husband's old account

Barclaycard - S.A.R 8/9/06 - Statements received 16/9/06 - Prelim letter 18/9/06 for £496.25 - Part offer received 22/9/06 for £228.00 - Rejection letter sent 25/9/06 - MCOL issued 8.10.06

MBNA - S.A.R 8/9/06 - Partial offer received 6/10/06 - full offer & interest received on 6.10.06

ACE CARDS & GIFTS - S.A.R - 19/9/06 - statements received -27th September - vouchers received in settlement - 4th October 2006 - £235.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just wondering if you have had any word from them yet???

Datxman v Lloyds TSB 2006 ** WON** 27/2/2006

With no conditions

Datxman v Capital One 2006

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter sent - July 2006

Non-compliance letter sent - 11/09/2006

enforcement letter sent - 11/09/2006

Statements finally received - 27/09/06

Prelim Letter - sent 28/09/06 - £540

Lowell has bought the debt and I have asked them to wipe it clean due to lack of funds

Datxman v Barclaycard 2006

Won no conditions

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]Time is running out for the banks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...