Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear, the 'hyper links' are somewhat automatic in the forum software, sometimes we are not a direct party to what issues these are causing users?
    • Thank you for your advice so far, I appreciate it. However, while I don't have a problem with (subjective) reformatting of my posts, adding hyperlinks to keywords, etc., please can you stop editing the content of what I write - in this case, making sure this now potentially appears prominently for anyone searching the purchasing dealer on search engines? It is putting words in my mouth and is just rude. My earlier comments are based on what the dealer told me. Had I known what would have happened, should I have named them, I wouldn't have, as I cannot guarantee the veracity of the claim with my own eyes.    I am aware of the basic intricacies of needing to prove law, and how it works in general, and having to prove loss, etc. The only legal recourse mentioned was if I needed to pay for it myself - and if I need to go that way, I will keep a running update here to help others. I am aware I will have to pay for the repair myself before I go down any legal recourse. There are other aspects of the various acts that can also be explored if it appears they are not following their obligations, other than me paying and claiming back. I am not a lawyer, nor have I needed to understand that the legislation does this depth in the past - hence my asking for assistance here. The only reason I mentioned it in passing is that it is the last resort.   And again, I don't mean to sound ungrateful for the advice given thus far, and appreciate it, and you have already helped. I feel like we have gone straight to level 11.   My current view of this is: It's closer to £9k, having looked at it again today. You may be able to drop £9k at the drop of a hat - but I can't, especially around an already expensive time of the year. And I earn enough to put me in the smaller percentage of the county’s earners. I hated having to type that as it can come across as boasting, but I did it to explain that having that much liquid cash is unrealistic - especially with interest rates what they are. I would have to sell equity, cash out saving etc. This will take time. The only card I have with enough credit limit to cover that much is my company one, which is a no-go. I agree this is taking too long for a simple, albeit expensive fault. It's analogous to fixing a crack in a windscreen. No one would call for an engineer report on that situation to know what the cause and solution was The core driver for me arriving here asking for advice is the additional delay their potential cowboy of an engineering company will introduce. A view reinforced having spoken to them to arrange a date. I am not putting any more exact details or prices at this stage, because I don't want to be any more identified than you already have by changing the thread title. One Google and those with knowledge know exactly who I am, and I don't want to potentially damage relations with the parties on my side by opening a potential can of worms. Law of unintended consequences and all that. In hindsight, I regret naming anyone yet, as this can still realistically be resolved this week. I just wanted to initially come for education and understand my options. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. And to escalate if plan A or B didn't work.   To answer:     I think I have. I phoned them today again, asserting the complaint was raised as a rejection under section 75 and recorded the call. I plan to follow this up tonight in an email with all the magic incantations and keywords I seem to have to include. However, I would still appreciate it being proofread if I could send it to someone via a PM. This is not because I have left any details out, it is just that it will include details around the repair I do not want to put in the public domain at this time, as it may compromise my position.
    • Hobnail please don't take offence . DX covers so many different threads throughout the Forum so tends to be quite short in more ways than one. And while he may have been away from school when public relations were on the curriculum he is right when he said that you do need to understand how these crooks operate to be able to able to beat them in Court. All of us here want our members to win against the parking companies  and the best way is to see how others have handled similar situations. I expect he knows that you may not have looked at many threads on here to give you ideas to better your chances of winning.   You may have heard of the expression "Judge Lottery" on here where some judge comes up with an off the wall decision that virtually no other judge has come up with. So even where you have almost a cast iron case it can all go awry and the way to help circumvent these judges is to have sufficient knowledge and understanding to be able to counter his or her judgement.   I happen to think that no one should lose their case on airport land since the roads  are usually covered by the Road Traffic Act and /or Bye Laws since the land is not relevant land under PoFA. But it is surely better to be over qualified in your knowledge of your case rather than being under prepared. You never know until it is too late when you needed to be over qualified. We all hate it here when one of our members don't win their case so DX in his own sweet way🙂  is just making sure that you have the best possible chance of walking away a winner.   PS I had started to write this before Dx wrote his post just now.  
    • this thread is rather co-incidental to yours - same players same amount.     looks like prac/bw might have looked at credit files to see who also lived there at the time, whom sadly they think be responsible too.   you say like the above thread, EON refunded the £89 earlier as an over payment payment? how strange, and after you moved out now claim its owed.   you are correct in saying you owe nowt, its after you moved out....ruddy fleecers.   as that other thread too, does the PRAC letter state our client EON at the top?        
    • you indicated you had collected stuff from lowells sent your old address? that is what we are interest in?   what is in the vanquis GDPR return (SAR) is pretty much immaterial now as you've not mentioned or referred to any of it in your WS.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Hoist/? Claimform - old Barclaycard 'debt'


pd007
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1992 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

seems to be a std thing for H2HP2 claims now

if you go read other hoist claims

you note such in your defence.

 

 

don't miss it!

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

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

They are still in default...fee returned or not...its the creditors prerogative if they wish to accept payment or not...I wonder if they are getting slightly confused with a CPR request ? :-)

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

defence due this Friday 15th april I intend to submit defence tomorrow night as still not heard back re ca request does it look ok ??

 

1.This claim is for the sum of £4000 (rounded down )in respect of monies owing under an agreement with the account number xx xx xx xx xx xx pursuant to the consumer creditlink3.gif act 1974 (CCa)

The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP ( ex barclaycard) to the claimant

and notice has been served .

2.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 s.87(1) CCA

 

3.The claimant claims

1) The sum of £4000

2) interest pursuant to s69 of the county courtlink3.gif act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from 27/5/10 to the date hereof 2116 is the sum of £1900

3)future interest accruing at the daily rate of £0.93

4) Costa

 

 

 

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 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 78 request.

 

3. Paragraph 3 & 4 are 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 23rd March 2016 I made a legal request by way of a section 78 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. 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

POC added to above

you need to align your reply to their paragraph numbers

not simply copy'n'paste from another thread

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

Thanks for the prompt reply just to clarify do I include all the extra bits in red too and amend them to reflect the details of my claim exact amounts account numbers etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

red bit is for your ref.

 

 

post up when ready

 

 

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

1.This claim is for the sum of £4000 (rounded down )in respect of monies owing under an agreement with the account number xx xx xx xx xx xx pursuant to the consumer creditlink3.gif act 1974 (CCa)

The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP ( ex barclaycard) to the claimant

and notice has been served .

2.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 s.87(1) CCA

 

3.The claimant claims

1) The sum of £4000

2) interest pursuant to s69 of the county courtlink3.gif act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from 27/5/10 to the date hereof 2116 is the sum of £1900

3)future interest accruing at the daily rate of £0.93

4) Costa

 

 

 

defence as follows is this now correct ?

 

 

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 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 78 request.

 

3. Paragraph 2 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 23rd March 2016 I made a legal request by way of a section 78 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. 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dx I know your very busy but could you cast your eye over my holding defence as I want to double check all ok to submit as want to submit this evening many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to address the [non] assignment in their para 1 too

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

add to your para 2

 

 

2. Paragraph 1 is denied that any notice of assignment – as required by section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and by section 82a of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – was received on or after xxxxxx

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

If there is a date in the poc that they alleged it was sent to you, thats the date you use, if there isnt then you dont Need to include " on or after xxxxx"

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

 

 

 

GEMHL Settled

Barclaycard Settled

A & L SETTLED IN FULL :lol:

Spml Reluctantly withdrawn

Blackhorse pre 31-7-06 Demand removal sent 23 8 06. ICO ordered removal jan 2007....REMOVED:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok that's great thank you so much for your help so far I'm off to submit the defence now I'm guessing it's just a waiting game to see what comes back from the claimant

Link to post
Share on other sites

it might be prudent to await andyorch to confirm.

 

 

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

If there is a date in the poc that they alleged it was sent to you, thats the date you use, if there isnt then you dont Need to include " on or after xxxxx"

 

or

 

 

The Defendant has no knowledge of any legal assignment. I have never been served any Notice of Assignment from

either the original creditor or the claimant pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

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 Defendant has no knowledge of any legal assignment. I have never been served any Notice of Assignment from

either the original creditor or the claimant pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

That reads alot better but let Andy confirm, he will see it

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

 

 

 

GEMHL Settled

Barclaycard Settled

A & L SETTLED IN FULL :lol:

Spml Reluctantly withdrawn

Blackhorse pre 31-7-06 Demand removal sent 23 8 06. ICO ordered removal jan 2007....REMOVED:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

look to the bottom of this thread you'll see everyone that's subscribed

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.This claim is for the sum of £4000 (rounded down )in respect of monies owing under an agreement with the account number xx xx xx xx xx xx pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974 (CCa)

 

2.The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP ( ex barclaycard) to the claimant 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 s.87(1) CCA

 

The claimant claims

 

1) The sum of £4000

2) interest pursuant to s69 of the county court act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from 27/5/10 to the date hereof 2116 is the sum of £1900

3)future interest accruing at the daily rate of £0.93

4) Costa

 

 

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 noted insofar as I have in the past held a contractual relationship with Barclaycard.I do not recall the precise details or aware of any outstanding balance.I therefore have sought clarification from the claimant by way of a CPR 31.14.Unfortunately the claimant has failed to comply to my request.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied I have no knowledge of any legal assignment. I have never been served any Notice of Assignment from either the original creditor or the claimant pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 and sec82A of the CCA 1974.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is denied.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 pursuant to s.87(1) CCA.

 

5. On the 23rd March 2016 I made a legal request by way of a section 78 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to comply with my request and is therefore in default and unable to enforce or request any relief until such time they comply.

 

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 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

 

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.

  • Haha 1

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

  • 1 month later...

Hi I have not heard anything from sols etc but got this yesterday :

 

Looking for advice on what to do next please

 

Notice of proposed allocation to the small claims court

If you do not comply with this notice the court will make such order as appears to be appropriate .

This could include striking out the claim or entering judgement .

 

TAKE NOTICE THAT

1. This is now a defended claim

The defendant has filed a defence , a copy of which is enclosed (THIS SENTANCE HAS BEED CROSSED OUT BY HAND )

2 It appear that this case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track .

If you believe that this track is not the appropriate track for the claim you must complete box C1 on the small claims Directions Questionnaire (Form N180) and explain why

3 You must by 6 June 2016 complete the small claims directions questionnaire (Form N180) and file it with the court office

The county court business centre 4th floor St Katharines house 21-27 st Katherine's street Northampton NN1 2 LH

And serve copies on all other parties

Link to post
Share on other sites

std N180 directions Questionnaire detailed in 100's of like threads here

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

Ok thanks I've had a read up on other threads I'm ticking yes to mediation just wanted to confirm that I need to send a copy to Hoist and that I should expect a copy from them too ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

correct

 

 

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...