Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so.
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. 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. 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 24/12/2022. 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 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: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
    • Always send with proof of posting from your Post Office, so there is a trail. Conversations , are designed to intimidate into paying, Emails are designed as another way of bombarding. Only EVER communicate in writing, by post.  
  • 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

Claim form Moon Beever / 1st Credit HSBC overdraft debt


nas2211
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2976 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

Plenty of examples for you to edit in the Legal Success forum Nas...simply find a similar claim preferably same creditor and adapt to suit your claim...post here before submitting.

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I've drafted my defence based on others I've been reading in the forum, and would be grateful for any feedback.

 

I'm hoping this can be settled at mediation, ideally by way of a Consent/Tomlin Order. Am I being realistic with this do you think?

 

So here's my proposed defence...

 

Particulars of claim

 

1. The Claimant is the assignee of a HSBC Bank Plc debt in the sum of £3,072 assigned on xx/01/2015. Statutory notices of assignment were sent to the defendant.

 

2. The debt is for arrears on an overdraft facility first opened by the original creditor on or about xx/01/2008 under reference xxxxxx/xxxxxxxx. The defendant used the credit facilities.

 

3. On xx/01/2014 the account defaulted with an outstanding balance of £2,835. The claimant and its predecessors in title demanded repayment of the sum due. In breach of contract the defendant failed to repay the sums due.

 

The Claimant claims:

 

The sum of £3072.00

Costs

 

Defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor HSBC Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for the alleged balance claimed.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is denied. I am not aware of ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied. To my knowledge HSBC or the Claimant have never served me a notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974

 

Any alleged amount claimed could only consist substantially of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments.

The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

 

4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.

 

(a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.

(b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.

(d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

(e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.

 

5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated XX February 2016 namely the Overdraft Agreement, Terms and Conditions relevant at the time of inception for the agreed overdraft, the Termination Demand Notice, Notices of sums in arrears, and Notices of Assignment inferred by the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.

 

The Claimant has failed to fully comply with this request.

 

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.

Edited by Andyorch
Edit
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one slight addition nas...rest is fine.

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for our purposes to cross check you have responded to all pleadings.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just received an acknowledgement of my defence

 

now the waiting starts to see if they contact me to settle or if they want to proceed.

 

In your experience does the court tend to prefer Claimants to attempt to resolve it outside of court

in the first instance, or is it standard practice for them to indicate they want to proceed without contacting me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

or not as the case maybe

if they feel brave enough they might proceed

if not they might let it get stayed and not reply.

 

 

as it stands

and you've already eluded too this from post 16

their case is weak

 

 

you don't mediate or answer them

till/if it gets to the mediation stage

which as yet it hasn't

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

Letter received today from 1st Credit advising of a change of legal representative, and enclosing a notice of change (now represented by 1st Credit legal department instead of Moon Beever).

 

They have also enclosed a copy of the notice of assignment from both HSBC and 1st Credit (why have they left it until this point to provide it?!)

 

The letter states:

 

'We have read your defence as filed and can discern no defence from the contents. We will be applying for summary judgement under Part 24 CPR (Civil Procedure Rules) on the basis that you do not have a defence.

 

We will refrain from doing so for 14 days to allow you to make payment of the claim amount, interest and costs, failing which you may assume that our application is in preparation and will be served on you by County Court in due course.'

 

I'm not sure what my best move would be now they've provided these documents, should I try to negotiate a settlement figure now or wait until it goes to mediation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me just refresh myself with your thread nas....see where we are with it.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

What does the NoA look like...is it a recreation or the originals ?

 

If you were to hazard a guess what split would you say of the debt refers to unfair charges ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy, difficult to say, but they have the appearance of an original with logos etc and dates match up.

 

I've looked through the statements, and I'd say the split on the original amount of c£2800 is probably about 20-30% charges from HSBC. Everything above that must be charges from 1st Credit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From their letter they don't appear to offer any kind of mediation or deal...they want the full amount.The fact that they raise Summary Judgment is a concern....it may be a bluff but it can have costs consequences for the defendant...above the normal SCT fixed costs.

 

Summary judgment(CPR 24.2) is a procedure by which any of the parties or the court can dispose of all or part of a case without a trial where:

 

• A claim or issue or a defence to a claim or issue has no real prospect of success and

• There is no other compelling reason for a trial.

 

Lets see if they do make that application before allocation.

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy, to be honest this has made me quite nervous now as I don't want to end up worse off.

 

 

I think I need to reflect on the situation for a few days as I always intended on settling,

 

 

I was just hoping to be able to negotiate the figure down.

 

 

I need to weigh up whether I'd be better off paying the extra now

to avoid the risk of it all escalating at the next stage

if they do go for summary judgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well don't dive in just yet.......as said it may be a bluff maybe not....what I would do is approach them within the given dates and suggest that you may consider a negotiation as the amount claimed does consist of mainly punitive charges and you are open to negotiation to reach a settlement....preferably by way of a Consent/Tomlin order...and possibly by way of a monthly payment plan...providing they let the claim stay.....with no CCJ.

 

This will distract them from the time limit and any application...they to are up against time limits...they either tell the court they wish to proceed or let it stay or they make application for SJ (the application is normally made pre allocation)...the fee would be £155....as opposed to a cheaper hearing fee to proceed.

 

Its worth a phone call..dont write...you will know straight away if they wish to consider from their reaction...and if they are not open to this then we can review a further strategy.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advice, I will prepare and call them this week to test the water. Good to know the additional amount for SJ, I feared we could be talking about £1000's more in legal fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advice, I will prepare and call them this week to test the water. Good to know the additional amount for SJ, I feared we could be talking about £1000's more in legal fees.

 

That's just the application fee...if they instruct counsel/barrister add another £1500.00:-)

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to a lady at 1st Credit legal today who was actually pretty nice and human sounding!

 

 

She said they would absolutely be willing to settle,

and for a lump sum would accept £2600,

or for instalments under a Tomlin order, they would accept £3100 over anything up to 6 years.

 

 

However the credit file entry would remain in both circumstances and either be updated to say partial settlement in the first instance, or updated monthly with the monthly payments in the second.

 

I left it that I would think about things and come back to her tomorrow to indicate how I would like to proceed.

 

I was wondering if there's a way I can negotiate the removal of the entry in the credit file as part of the Tomlin order?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent so now you know they are open to negotiation...the balance and terms of any Tomlin can be negotiated to suit both parties...so you will have to give that some thought.

 

I doubt you will be able to negotiate any removal of the Default Marker..you may get it marked settled or satisfied.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont forget the unfair charges /interest applied also...start at say £2K...but keep in mind ...you really don't know if they were going to make application for SJ.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...