Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It seems to me that you could probably apply for judgement on 30 October. However it's a good idea to keep on checking regularly to see if it is permitted before then. As soon as it allows you, do it.
    • Deemed service on a company is two days after issue. Deemed service on a litigant in person is five days after issue – unless something has changed. I've already said that proposing to send further particulars is generally speaking unnecessary and only complicates matters as you are finding out. However as you have indicated that you are sending further particulars, send them further particulars and simply state in the body of the particulars that you have nothing to add to the particulars of claim contained in the original claim form at this moment. Send that straightaway so that when you apply for judgement you can click the box and say that yes you have done that. It might not have been fatal not to have informed them that it was a laptop – but it is better that you did and the important thing is that they had been told of the item and of the value at the time that you entered into the delivery contract. I think that you will find that laptops are one of their prohibited items – along with almost everything else in the world
    • *Update* turns out Capquest bought the debt from Phoenix Recoveries. We now have a reference number for our solicitor to use. 
    • Ah I thought you meant in the actual MCOL claim, in the ebay listing yes, in the PackLink compensation claim yes as well, in the MCOL claim I made no mention aside from the value of the item.   and just an update:   I am able to request a judgement from the two separately.   The claim was issued on the 13th, plus 5 days and another 14 days = 1st Nov my guess (not accounting for business days)   This was also added:    
    • Okay, so what you have to do is you have to take the money you paid to the garage which I understand is £2000. You've gotta consider that the value of the labour they put in was completely wasted because you had to have the turbo taken out and then refitted – is this correct? However, the turbo itself was useful to you and so you should be required to pay for the cost of the turbo. If this is correct and you have independent evidence that the turbo had been incorrectly fitted then you should sue them for the balance. This means that you have to find out the cost of a turbo – was it an original or was it a pattern part? Anyway, you have to find out the cost of the turbo and deduct that from the £2000 and that should be the value of your claim unless you can tell us of any other losses which you have reasonably incurred as a result of their poor workmanship. Let us know
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

ME III/Mortimer claimform - JDW SimplyBE CAT 'debt'


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1591 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

Hi,

 

This is my final v of the defense

 

Would you please check it for me?

 

Particulars of Claim as written on the form exactly;

 

1."By an agreement between JD Williams & the Defendant dated 18/04/2007 ("the agreement")

JD Williams agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit account.

 

 

2.The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments Due & the Agreement was terminated.

The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant.

 

 

3.THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE RE CLAIMS 1. 1031.75"

 

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 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

(1) Paragraph 1. The defendant concedes that an agreement did once exist with JD Williams, save as expressly admitted, I cannot recall the precise details or account number and have therefore requested verification on which their claim relies..

 

(2) Paragraph 2. The defendant is unaware of any outstanding balances and is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served.

 

On the 12th May 2016 the Defendant requested information (sent by recorded delivery) pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request to be complied with in the 14 day period. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

 

(3) It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment, balance or breach requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

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

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for including any charges and interest; and

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

(d) provide an original assignment in writing signed by the assignor at time of alleged assignment pursuant to Section 136 of the Law or Property Act 1925.

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

 

(5) 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.

 

(6) 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.

On the basis of this the defendant respectfully requests the case be struck out due to lack of supporting evidence proving any debt exists or is owned by the Claimant.

 

Thx

Edited by Andyorch
Particulars added for cross checking
Link to post
Share on other sites

(1) – Paragraph 1. The defendant concedes that an agreement did once exist with JD Williams, however, the defendant denies any such agreement exists with ME III Limited, Cabot Financial or any other Company.

 

The claimant does not plead you have an agreement with them.....

 

1."By an agreement between JD Williams & the Defendant dated 18/04/2007 ("the agreement") JD Williams agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit account.

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

Here is a recent Cat defence that Andyorch drafted for another poster

which was successful in the claim remaining stayed.

.

You will have to edit slightly to suit and add your requests for CCA /CPR ect.....

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.

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 noted. I have had an agreement in the past with [enter original creditor] but do not recognise the account number referred to by the claimant.

.

2 .Paragraph 2 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over X years ago.

.

On the DD/MM/YYYY ( sent by recorded delivery) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

.

3.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

.

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

.

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

.

5.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 crediticon Act 1974.

.

6.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.

.

Regards

.

Andy

***************

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
Ta, so I should remove the part you have placed in bold and just leave the first bit then?

 

Yes...and add the what was originally advised by dx100 above

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

Dont miss your deadline, FRIDAY 3RD JUNE by 4PM

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

:thumb:As you can see I had already amended your point 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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Letter received from Solicitors;

 

We have received your defence.

 

We are taking our clients instructions in relation to your defence and will back to you as soon as we can. In the meantime, the matter has been placed on hold.

 

Yours xxxxxxx

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...