Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I have to ask you once again, has sweatband eventually refused to accept any responsibility for this now that you have been knocked back by the manufacturer? I'd be very grateful if you could address this question which I've already asked twice now.
    • Hi    The first one was purchased in August 2020 and returned in October. This is the link to the page.    https://www.sweatband.com/proform-pro-1500-treadmill.html   We wanted to research our rights so we were clear on them before going back to the manufacturer or sweatband. The last communication was with the manufacturer who sweatband directed us to and the manufacturer told us the location of the treadmill was unsuitable and we had to move it our it would void our warranty.    I wonder if you could be kind enough to let me know if you think the link above affects our protection under the consumer rights act?    Thank you again  EM0149
    • I notice that you haven't addressed my question as to whether sweatband.com have actually refused to take any responsibility for this now.
    • Thanks! I've had several successes in the past 4 years or so which stemmed from a financially difficult part of my life around 2011/13. Basically I was financially trapped with Quick Quid, in a cycle of increased borrowing, during this I'd opened three catalogue accounts: Studio, JD Williams and Simply Be , 2 credit cards (Aqua and Barclays) and was juggling finances. In that time I had got 2 CCJs plus 2 defaults so things were pretty tight. I was using most of my available credit until things eventually became unsustainable. When I moved house I used the deposit to pay off Quick Quid and got into arrangements to repay the catalogues. The credit card limit was still rising until 2017 when I borrowed the balance of nearly £6000 from a family member and cleared the Aqua card. The Barclaycard had already defaulted. In 2017 I began action for irresponsible lending against Quick Quid. Basically they could not show the criteria they used to make lending decisions  and kept lending to me so I won the case. I was refunded all interest and fees  and charges plus 8% pa. When it was upheld it gave me the confidence to challenge JDW and SB. These were also upheld and they had to repay interest, fees and charges plus 8% from the second credit limit increase which amounted to about £1200 each. I challenged Aqua where my redress covering 6 years fees, interest and charges accrued to nearly £9000.  Barclaycard was not upheld but the default was moved back to an earlier date meaning it expires sooner.  All my IRL cases succeeded because none of these companies could prove that they had diligently checked my financial history. My credit report clearly showed that I was using a high or at limit proportion of available credit and that I'd accrued two unconnected CCJ's and 2 defaults throughout the lives of these accounts. Whether they should have given me the accounts in the first place was also brought into question but it was the sustained but gradual increase of CL's time and time again without proper checks. JDW were unable or unwilling to show the ombudsman what criteria they used. It only appeared that because I paid on time they continued to offer increases where in reality I was actually juggling finances like a fine balancing act.  It would appear that the FOS are looking at catalogue debt as I know when my cases against JDW and SB were being investigated they mentioned this.  My case against Studio should conclude soon. I was curious as to why now Cabot are trying to cut their losses by offering such a hefty discount. I can only summise that Studio are trying to buy back the debt for less.  
    • They have made an offer  Remind them in no uncertain terms that under CONC they are responsible for the conduct of their agents , (research and quote this) and negotiate a payment plan of their offer As dx says we really need all the details to understand the full picture 
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Claim Form from Hoist. Former cahoot flexi loan.....


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1593 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

hello all, totally distraught to receive this just before christmas :(

any help advice or moral support gratefully received.

 

Name of the Claimant Hoist portfolio

Date of issue – 14 12 2015

 

 

defence due by 4pm Friday 15 th jan

What is the claim for..

 

 

..the claim is for £11000 in respect of monies owed under the CCA.

The debt legally assigned by santander and notice has been served.

the defendant failed to make any payments.

a default notice was served. the claimant claims

 

1. the sum of 11300

2. interest at 8%

3 daily intrest

4.costs

 

 

What is the value of the claim? £11000 ish

The claim is for a loan, specifically a cahoot flexi loan

entered into agreement Jan 2006.

The account has been assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.

The account has been asigned multiple times, do not believe i have ever heard of Hoist before, so no do not believe i had been notified in this instance.

i really cant remember if i received a Default Notice from the original creditor.

 

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

Why did you cease payments?

The cahoot flexiloan was a nightmare product,

which caused us to fall into financial difficulties.

i did approach the financial ombudsman in 2012 for help in sorting it out.

 

What was the date of your last payment, no idea, my partners credit rating account gives the default date as 9/2011

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? in my opinion yes, but the fca ruled not.

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? yes, but was turned down by then Santander.

i have been on moneyclaim online,

registered and acknowlaged the form,

can any one tell me when the defence must be submitted

by taking into account the christmas period??

The Claim Form is in joint names but there is no record of this loan on my credit report

and i genuinely cant recollect if the loan was taken out in joint names.

 

will the fact that we took this account to be looked at by the financial ombudsman count against us in this?

 

am i better to try and agree a settlement rather than go through the stress??

Edited by mao
to add detail
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

no and no to your last 2 questions.

 

 

go ack [AOS] the claim on mcol website

defend all

leave juris unticked.

 

get a CCA Requestlink3.gif

 

get a CPR 31:14 from the legal section of the librarylink3.gif running to the sols [who are?]

 

read the FULL CCA/CPR threads fully first

don't signlink3.gif anything.

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

Thank you dx100uk

 

 

Printed the appropriate letters, CCA and CPR ready to post tommorow, each one special delivery (?)

and the CCA with a postal order.

 

 

Had a closer at my partners credit report and on there the loan amount taken out in 2006 is identical to the default amount in 2011.

 

 

How could that possibly be right?

 

 

Strange, can only imagine that possibly the default amount was greater than the loan amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

does seem strange to me too...

 

 

surely some payments would have been made. between those 2 dates?

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

The cahoot flexi loan was a notorious product.

 

 

It operated like a credit card or overdraft whereby you could pay the monthly payment then withdraw the balance, less the interest.

 

 

Cahoot and later Santander maladministered these accounts like you wouldn't believe.

 

 

Statements weren't issued for months and months on end, a

nd then when they did they had no interest rates on them

or they were written as 0% when they weren't etc etc etc just a fiasco really.

 

 

But yes payment were made and drawn down against between those dates,

just surprised that they were identical amounts implying that every last penny had been drawn down?

 

 

Does not sit right with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes we've seen these before

 

 

and sounds like the HFC personal loan plus debacle

 

 

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...

Received a slippery letter from Robinson Way.

 

"we write to confirm that we have noted the dispute / query that you have raised.

we will make the necessary enquiries and let you know the outcome in due course. in the meantime we will stop all collection activities on this account."

 

They sent this letter to my partner i imagine to acknowledge the CCA request sent to Lowels. no word on my CCA request (joint account). i think the wording is horrible and is i imagine to encourage some not to enter a defence.My defence is due 15th january. will read through the library for template suggestions. and post here before i submit.

 

thank you xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes you are on the right track, do not miss your defence filing date under any circumstances

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
Received a slippery letter from Robinson Way.

 

"we write to confirm that we have noted the dispute / query that you have raised.

we will make the necessary enquiries and let you know the outcome in due course. in the meantime we will stop all collection activities on this account."

 

They sent this letter to my partner i imagine to acknowledge the CCA request sent to Lowels. no word on my CCA request (joint account). i think the wording is horrible and is i imagine to encourage some not to enter a defence.My defence is due 15th january. will read through the library for template suggestions. and post here before i submit.

 

thank you xx

there are no template defences in our library

 

each defence/case is unique to you

 

however other THREADS here and in the legal successes forum might help guide you

 

no paperwork/holding 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

hello, defense due friday, so this is what i think i will file? please if any one could check i would be more than grateful.

 

on the claimform form it says.... and i presume this is what i am defending against?

 

this claim is for £1xxxx.xx in respect of monies owed pursuant to the consumer credit act under account no xxxxx xxxxx

the debt was legaly asigned by santander uk plc and notice has been served.

the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1).

 

so my defence is this,

 

Defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of this claim are vague, generic and speculative 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.

 

 

On the 18th December 2015 I made a legal request by way of a section 77. CCA request to the Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this claim.

 

The claimant has also failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of the Section 77. request.

 

The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received.The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

The Defendant maintains that an assignation notice was never received. the Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant.

 

As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

 

have i got this this right?? thank you in advance! xx

 

also im worried that i have made a mistake. i sent a s77 request when in other defenses the talk of a section 78 request. my default is in respect of a loan....?

 

edit

although it was sold as a loan, the product operated more like a credit card.

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

hi dx100uk, that's the thread that inspired my defense. do you think i should use something closer to his? wanted to try and keep it simple. thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you must ref / reply to their paragraphs number

 

 

use the one in that thread as it is [almost]

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

Am i missing something or is the paragraph on the claim form I'm responding too with my defence or is there a more comprehensive version of the claim somewhere on mcol that I haven noticed? I will do as you suggested and copy his defence more closely! X

Link to post
Share on other sites

From your initial post#1

 

 

..the claim is for £11000 in respect of monies owed under the CCA.

The debt legally assigned by Santander and notice has been served.

the defendant failed to make any payments.

a default notice was served. the claimant claims

 

1. the sum of 11300

2. interest at 8%

3 daily intrest

4.costs

 

From your post #11

 

this claim is for £1xxxx.xx in respect of monies owed pursuant to the consumer crediticon act under account no xxxxx xxxxx

the debt was legally assigned by Santander uk plc and notice has been served.

the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1).

 

 

You have to post your particulars from the claim form verbatim...do not change words do not add words do not miss off any word...otherwise your defence will be incorrect.

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

opps that's because the lower one is from this thread...

the one I pointed too.[see post 37in this thread its not the poc of this thread]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?441250-Hoist-Cohen-Claimform-old-Cahoot-loan-from-2001***Claim-Discontinued

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

Why are particulars from another thread being copied to this thread :!:

 

No wonder we cant advise...if its correct or not

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

so

this is the correct POC

 

 

I have added paragraph numbers to give you an idea ...

 

 

POC

 

 

1...the claim is for £11000 in respect of monies owed under the CCA.

The debt legally assigned by Santanderlink3.gif and notice has been served.

 

2. the defendant failed to make any payments.

a default notice was served.

3.the claimant claims

 

1. the sum of 11300

2. interest at 8%

3 daily interest

4.costs

so bar the numbers I've added

this is what appears on the claimform?

  • Confused 1

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

Im sorry for any confusion. i abrevaited a little because it takes a long time to type with two fingers....... i do appreciate the help you have both given me.

 

the POC on the claimform reads exactly as follows

1.this claim is for the sum £1xxxx.xx in respect of monies owed pursuant to the consumer credit act under account no xxxxx xxxxx

2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander uk plc and notice has been served.

3.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1).

 

4.the claimant claims

1. the sum of £1xxxx.xx

 

2 interest pursuant to s69 of the county court act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 13/11/15 to the date herof 27 days is the sum of £67.00

daily interest at the rate of £2.49

costs

 

so my defence is

 

 

Defence

 

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.

 

1. Paragraph 1 is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied the Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received.The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

4. On the 18th December 2015 I made a legal request by way of a section 77 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this claim.

 

5.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

6.As the Claimant alleges 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 credit Act 1974.

 

7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

 

 

is this better? also is it ok to just copy and paste this as it is into the mcol form? thank you so very much.

Edited by Andyorch
edited and changed
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've added para numbers to their poc

align your refs properly now too

 

 

you number one

does not need to have a number

its simply a statement about the whole claim/poc

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

andyorch should pop in sometime

 

 

just to check it over

you have till 4pm

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
Im sorry for any confusion. i abrevaited a little because it takes a long time to type with two fingers....... i do appreciate the help you have both given me.

 

the POC on the claimform reads exactly as follows

1.this claim is for the sum £1xxxx.xx in respect of monies owed pursuant to the consumer credit act under account no xxxxx xxxxx

2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander uk plc and notice has been served.

3.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1).

 

4.the claimant claims

1. the sum of £1xxxx.xx

 

2 interest pursuant to s69 of the county court act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 13/11/15 to the date herof 27 days is the sum of £67.00

daily interest at the rate of £2.49

costs

 

so my defence is

 

 

Defence

 

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.

 

1. Paragraph 1 is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied the Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received.The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

4. On the 18th December 2015 I made a legal request by way of a section 77 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this claim.

 

5.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

6.As the Claimant alleges 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 credit Act 1974.

 

7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

 

 

is this better? also is it ok to just copy and paste this as it is into the mcol form? thank you so very much.

 

Okay mao...I have made a few changes and put it back to the way I originally drafted the defence.I have changed the numbering of the Particulars and your responses also.

 

Just your response 1 now that requires attention and addressing......

 

1. Paragraph 1 is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

 

That is not a valid reason for denying a claim...are you prepared to stand in court and state to a District Judge that you have never had a cahoot flexi loan ?

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for taking the time for me andyorch.

 

 

Hoist Have made the claim that it was a joint account.

 

 

I'm not sure it ever was, the original payment to cahoot came out of a joint account

but I'm not sure my name was ever in the agreement.

 

 

They have mis spelt my name on the court claim and there is no mention on my credit rating.

 

 

My partner however deffinately did have a cahoot account.

As the claim is in joint names what should I do?

 

 

Thank you x

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...