Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks guys. Updated witness statement accordingly with dx's post. I have a draft order. As follows, is this ok?   It is ordered that: 1. The default judgment dated 10 November 2021 be set aside. 2. The Claimant pays the Defendant’s costs of this application to the sum of £275. 3. The Claimant has permission to file and serve a reply if so required.   4. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.   So with the N244.. include the Witness statement, draft defence, and draft order? And include a copy of all evidence?   Thanks
    • we need the exact particulars of claim, not what you have put please.  
    • Thank you everyone for your quick responses I just wish I posted here in the first place    I probably shouldn't have filled in the claim form however on the letter it said I had limited time to do so and because I was dealing with CST law trying to come to an agreement with paying off the debt I didn't think it would get to this point and now I have probably made my situation worst. Of course, I would have posted here first before sending it off had I not been in communication with CST to set up an agreement.    I sent the letter back to the court as some point in early August, the issue date on the claim form is 28th July and the most recent letter I have received 'Notice of fast track' is dated 18th November    If I am honest I can't fully remember what I wrote word for word in my defence, it would have been along the lines of why I left, my reasons and the fact I returned to my old career in an office plus taking a pay cut to do so. There wasn't much room to write a long winded defence so I kept it relativity short.   The above document Andy has posted is the exact document I am now looking at very confused in what exactly I put where    I just want to re-iterate I never agreed with this money I owe due to the training bond but it has gone on for so long at this point I'm happy to set up a payment plan if the balance can get reduced or a small one off payment upfront and this is exactly what I was trying to do prior to receiving the most recent letter    I have had zero communication from CST law, Centrica advised me to deal with them directly and I was waiting for a response from CST with the offer we had put across to Centrica - I chased it multiple times the following weeks and they kept telling me they haven't had a response and when they do we'll contact you which they still have not   Ideally I would rather not give them any money however I feel like I am out of options at what I probably should have done years ago is attempt to get it reduced and set up a payment plan    Please let me know if I have missed any critical info out    Thanks again for everyones help    What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? I left a British Gas apprenticeship within the first 12 months of starting and went back to my old career in an office , my reasons for leaving were down to the completely differant job role which I realised quikcly was not for me and it was impacting my mental health massively. The claim is for a training bond which was in a contract I signed based on a sliding scale Year 1 - £9,000 year 2 £6,000 year 3 £3,000     What is the total value of the claim? £13433    Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No  Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Training bond due to leaving an apprenticeship before 3 years    When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? They have sent me a virtually signed document with the contract   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? No   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. Centrica are claimant, CST law are dealing and the court   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I believe so yes   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I have had multiple letters like everyone else who has been on the forum over the years regarding this matter   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? I am unsure, but when I left I had contested the original claim as I was dealing directly with Centrica’s collection team and they never got back to me after the final email I had sent and didn’t hear anything until years down the line   Why did you cease payments? N/A   What was the date of your last payment? N/A   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Correct I oringinally contested what was owed back in 2017 and gave my reasons for leaving and I assumed the matter was closed   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No  
    • OK thanks again Andy.   And understood 👍😉
    • Thank you for this. The first thing to be say is that this means that you are winning. It is pretty well unheard of in my experience for the bank to give way and finally return the money. The fact that they have done this under the threat of a judgement for breach of statutory duty indicates even more that they are worried about their position. Nowhere have they indicated that they have complied with the requirements of the Proceeds of Crime Act and informed the National crime agency. I don't believe they have and this is a very serious breach of statutory duty. Not only that it is a very serious breach of the FCA BCOBS regulations in that they are required to treat you fairly. Treating you fairly in this case means that they must comply with the rest of their statutory duties. It appears that they really haven't done this at all and that they have acted in an arbitrary way in disregard of the law and that they are hoping to get away with it. I find myself wondering how many other hundreds of people have been treated in exactly the same way – and you are probably the first ever to have stood up to them and to get them worried. I think I've already indicated that a press contact of mine in the Sunday Times would be very interested in this story. He has already run stories about the very poor standards applied by banks when deciding that their customers are involved in some fraudulent behaviour. The first thing to say about the letter which you have received is that they are trying to apply conditions to releasing your own money. It's your money and there should be no conditions and my suggestion is that you object to this. Secondly, not only are they threatening to continue to withhold your own money – but also they are saying that if they release it to you you will simply have the net figure without any kind of interest or compensation. It's clear that while they have had your money, they have invested it and earn money on it. They have probably been lending it out at between 16% and 20% and although the usual rate of interest is 8%, it seems to me that justice can only be served by repaying you your money plus the commercial rate of interest – at a compound rate. Normally the 8% is calculated at simple. Thirdly, they are not offering to pay you any compensation and clearly they are hoping to get away with it without any kind of sanction or not even a slap on the wrist.   Fourthly, they had the nerve to impose a seven day deadline. Don't worry about their deadline. It's a load of huff and puff. This is all part of their bluff game designed to intimidate you. At the end of seven days – what? Are they then going to insist on going to court?   If they really believe that they had done everything correctly and that the money was fraudulent, then they would not offer it to you back under any circumstances. It would be illegal for them to do so. You can be certain that these people do not want to go to court. In fact they probably wish they had never started.   Finally, they want the matter to be kept confidential – and I can't say I blame them. I would be ashamed if people knew that I had treated somebody else in this way and I'm sure they are worried about reputational damage. I'm also sure that there are extremely worried about what will happen if you get a judgement against them for breach of statutory duty. It will have to be reported to the FCA. It will have to be reported to the NCA. And of course it should be reported to the newspapers because people need to know what is going on. If you want, you can simply accept their proposal – get your money back, given confidentiality – and that's the end of the matter. However, you have no idea how this will impact on your record in the future. I imagine that they will bar you from ever opening an account with them again. – But at least you will have your money and you can get on with your life. However, if you want you can stand your ground and make it clear to them that you are going to be mucked around and treated like this and that you are prepared to go to court if they won't make a proper offer. I understand that you need to pay a court fee of about £350 in the next seven days. I expect that the bank is making this offer now hoping to dissuade you from spending any more money and hoping that you will back down. If you have the money to proceed then I would suggest very strongly that it will be a very serious sign of strength that you tell the bank that you're not interested in that you are paying the fee for the next stage of the court process. If the bank knows that you've called their bluff on this and that you have been prepared to invest further money in moving this legal action forward, then they will start to reflect and I can perfectly well imagine that they will make you another more interesting offer – once again on conditions of confidentiality. Without seeing any further offer, I'm already suggesting that you will probably be best off turning it down. In any event, I would remind you going back several months that I already predicted that the bank would make you confidential offer – and that has happened. I'm not saying that I'm always going to be right here – but I think that now basically the bank have pretty well admitted that they need to pay you your money, there is no chance of you losing it. You will get your money and it really is just a question of how much else you will get in addition. If you'd like to continue then let me know and I will suggest a draft response to them.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Cabot/Mortimer Clerke Claimform - Old LV Credit Card 'debt'


Charbydis
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2077 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

Name of the Claimant ? Cabot Financial(UK) Ltd

Date of issue – . 2/3/2016

What is the claim for –

 

 

1. By an agreement between Liverpool Victoria and the Defendent on or around 15/6/2000("the agreement")

Liverpool Victoria agreed to issue the defendant with a credit card.

The defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the agreement was terminated.

The agreement was therefore assigned to the claimant.

2. The claimant therefore claims £8100

 

What is the value of the claim? £8100

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

 

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

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 purchaser

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I may have some time ago

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I may have

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No

Why did you cease payments? September 2013

What was the date of your last payment? 1/9/2013 approx

 

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?

Yes, I entered into a DMP with payplan in 2006/2007 but came out of it in September 2013

as most of my debts had been sold and none of the DCAs could provide the required paperwork

 

What you need to do now.

 

Answer the questions above

 

If you have not already done so – send a CCA Requesticon to the claimant for a copy of your agreement - done

(except for Overdraft/ Mobile/Telephone accounts)

 

Send a CPR31.14 request to the solicitor named on the claim form for copies of documents mentioned/implied within the claim form. There are two different versions - one for Loans/Credit cards the other for Current accounts - done

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you acknowledged on mcol and ticked defend all?

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

Yesterday I received a letter from CABOT, redirected from my old address, dated 27/1/16 saying this account was being selected for legal action. Now checking my records I sent a CCA request to them some years ago and then a second letter pointing out that they still hadn't complied with my request. Should I point this out to them or put it in my defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

neither at this stage

 

 

simply file the no paperwork/holding defence by the correct date

the rest can be expanded upon later in your WS

should they progress it that far.

 

 

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

Yesterday I received a letter from CABOT, redirected from my old address, dated 27/1/16 saying this account was being selected for legal action. Now checking my records I sent a CCA request to them some years ago and then a second letter pointing out that they still hadn't complied with my request. Should I point this out to them or put it in my defence.

 

Have you sent a further request since the claim was issued?

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I received a letter from mortimer clerk saying they had asked arrow for the paperwork in my CPR request and would be putting any legal action on hold until the paper work arrived.

 

 

While this seems good I guess I should still file my defence anyway as I don't know if they have told the court this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep you file regardless

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

Particulars of Claim

 

1. By an agreement between Liverpool Victoria and the Defendant on or around 15/6/2000("the agreement") Liverpool Victoria agreed to issue the defendant with a credit card.*The defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the agreement was terminated.*The agreement was therefore assigned to the claimant.

 

 

2. The claimant therefore claims £8100

 

 

#####Defence#####

 

1. 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.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is accepted insofar as that I have in the past held a contractual relationship with Liverpool Victoria. I do not recall the precise details of the account and have requested verification from the claimant to which they have yet to comply.It is denied the claimant has provided the me with notice of assignment in accordance with s136 law and property act 1925 and therefore have yet to prove they are entitled to bring this claim.

 

3. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Mortimer Clerke Solicitors and Cabot Financial(UK) Ltd. by way of a CPR 31.14 and a section 78 request. To date, no response has been received from Mortimer Clerke other than to acknowledge receipt of the request and that they have submitted it to C. I have not had any response from Cabot Financial(UK) Ltd.

 

5. Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

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

 

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

 

© show how the agreement was legally terminated to allow the claimant relief.

 

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

 

6. As per*Civil Procedure*Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. On the alternative, if the Claimant 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.

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...