Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes apologies I thought it was a fixed loan as it involves a guarantee and being a business debt
    • Intrum passing account on to resolvecall and arranging home visit   Any advice 
    • On the second claim – for the front patio and in respect of which you haven't so far issue the claim, as far as we can make out – once again with the kind assistance of my site team colleague @FTMDave, we think that the correct claim should be     This would leave you with a patio which had cost you £7888 – and which is the price that you originally contracted for .   You agreed to pay £7888 for the front patio. If you claimed the £14,000 or so that you are proposing, you would be in a position where you would be getting a front patio almost free of charge   So we think that your claim should properly be for £6439.60 p However in the circumstances, I should certainly wait until we figure out what to do about the first claim that you put in. I've already suggested that you contact the sheriffs – and maybe you would come back here and let us know that you have done that and what they said.   incidentally, these are our figures – you need to do your own calculations and confirm them independently or come up with a different calculation – independently. Same for the first claim.
    • I got a letter saying the police have not received my form, license that I had to send off for 3 points, I have paid the £100 aswell, I sent the license off and form, on the 12th of November, and it got there on the 15th of November, it was signed by the court and it was photographed, for proof..   The letter states I have  an extra 7 days to send it in.. received the letter on the 24th of November...   what happens next? I cannot phone the number on the letter until Monday, its a Monday-Friday helpline...   The last thing  I want is them at my door for arrest, or even banning me from driving...
    • 3rd Try   STATEMENT OF  I Mr will say as follows:    INTRODUCTION  1: I am the defendant and state that the facts contained in this statement are true to the best of my knowledge.   2: There are several documents attached with this statement. (paginated)   3: The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29/09/2017 a notice of assignment, incorrectly dated (See Exhibit 1) was sent to the defendant. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct, disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed ...10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. The claimant then issues on mass claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.   4: 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.   BACKGROUND   5: The Claim relates to an Alleged Credit card agreement between the defendant and Vanquis bank.   6: Whilst it is accepted that the defendant has in the past had contractual dealings with Vanquis, the defendant is unaware of what alleged debt the claimant refers.   7: The defendant has requested on numerous times a copy of the CCA, the first time, claimant has replied back on 23/11/2020 (Exhibit 1) with a copy of the agreement and notice of assignment, the agreement being a printed out application form, followed by my another letter containing statements(not enclosed). Defendant then again requested on the 07/12/2020 (see letter attached Exhibit 2) a copy of the CCA, claimant has replied back on the 28th Jan 2021 claiming that the evidence enclosed rebuts defendants defence and encloses a statement and default notice. (Exhibit 3) 8: The defendant stated in his defence that no evidence of the CCA has been provided. 9. The alleged account is £less that £200 over the credit limit but the default notice states that the arrears on the account is £200. Under section  87/88 of the CCA the default notice should not include unlawful fees in it sum requested. 10. The defendant sent a Subject Access Request letter dated 30/11/2021, on writing this witness statement nothing has been received.   DEFENCE:   11: The claimant has not provided a true copy of the CCA despite numerous requests being made firstly in September and secondly on the 07/12/2020 in response to claim despite stating in the letter dated 23rd October 2020 `please find enclosed a copy of the agreement. Should the claimant magically supply some form of CCA at trial, defendant would highlight why this wasn't provided, when requested, on numerous times before trial. Defendant would then highly stress to the court that this is indeed not the true copy of the executed Credit agreement.   12: There is no valid copy of an executed consumer credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974   13: The `so called ` copy of agreement stated in claimants letter dated 23/11/2020 is in fact stated as an online application and is no more than a log from either the OC`s operating system or one that has been constructed since with details from the account to look like an application. 14. The notice of assignment dated 11th May 2017 (Exhibit 1) states that the debt was sold to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on the 29th September 2017. This is confirmed in 2 separate letters. One from Vanquis and the other from Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. Section 82A of the CCA 1974 states that the assignee must arrange for notice of the assignment to given to debtor. The above letters show that the notice of assignment has incorrect dates, thus rendering the notice of assignment invalid and thus the claimant has not acquired the debt correctly and thus cannot claim.   IN CONCLUSION:   15: Without a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974 the claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt and has in fact attempted to mislead the courts in to believing that they have the necessary paperwork.   16: The incorrect dated Notice of Assignments letters questions the ability of the claimant to maintain correct paperwork and thus the defendant is unsure what paperwork supplied is correct.   17: It is therefore requested that the Claimants Claim is struck out pursuant to the above.   Signed  Dated this day…….      Could you check out this part   "14. The notice of assignment dated 11th May 2017 (Exhibit 1) states that the debt was sold to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on the 29th September 2017. This is confirmed in 2 separate letters. One from Vanquis and the other from Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. Section 82A of the CCA 1974 states that the assignee must arrange for notice of the assignment to given to debtor. The above letters show that the notice of assignment has incorrect dates, thus rendering the notice of assignment invalid and thus the claimant has not acquired the debt correctly and thus cannot claim."
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

unknown Hoist CCJ for old abbey loan - set aside help please


Kickermom
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1993 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

My husband asked for a ccj to be removed

as he had no idea what the ccj was for

upon going to court it was with hoist for an old abbey loan

 

they didnt attend but sent a letter requesting it to not be removed

on the grounds a payment was made in 2012 which i have no record of

 

she said they would need to send the particulars and prove the £20 payment or its statute barred.

 

After hassling them we recieved the particulars but have no idea how to file my defence.

 

The Pc1 was the origional agreement between him and Abbey.

The 4 main pages of particulars are attached please someone help

Edited by martin2006
Attachments unapproved, personal details visible
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kickermom and Welcome to CAG

 

If you could convert your uploads to PDF file..to make easy reading (you can add them all to one PDF) for one upload.

 

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks kicker...so where are we with the set a side ...the court has set it aside or are yet to consider and you have to submit a defence?

 

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

She has set it aside and im now having to submit my defence.

 

The soliciters on behalf of hoist sent me the files on my post number 5

there was the origional agreement

the statement

then a statement of payments

and some jargen letters from 2014

 

sent to an address i havent lived at in 12 years

and different to the address on the agreement

Link to post
Share on other sites

whats this cobbled together statement they've sent?

that's a cut and paste jobbie!!

 

 

and who were these 'informal payments' made to

and were they actually paid by you?

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

Well if you have not made those payments copied and pasted to the original statement..then you need to submit a statute barred defence and put them to proof that they can evidence said payments...what bank sort number account number and account name holder.

 

DX can give you the standard SB defence but don't submit it just yet it requires adapting to put them to proof.

 

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

havinastella

it says informal payments after, to 7/2/12.

but, that is disputed by the op.

and their statement sheet, as dx says, looks dodgy after that august payment.

 

what was the date of the claim form

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

She has set it aside and im now having to submit my defence.

 

The soliciters on behalf of hoist sent me the files on my post number 5

there was the origional agreement

the statement

then a statement of payments

and some jargen letters from 2014

 

sent to an address i havent lived at in 12 years

and different to the address on the agreement

 

 

so what date has the court given for the hearing that you need to submit this defence for?

who has said you need to submit a defence and when?

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

Did you ever enter a debt management plan? The use of the phrase "informal payments" is worrying that's what use by dmp firms supposedly helping you but actually doing the opposite.

 

No never

Link to post
Share on other sites

SB defences...

 

 

but let andy adapt.

 

 

The following defence is all you need if it is SB

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.

.

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

.

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC] or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

..

..ends..

 

alternative whereby claimant intimates SB date=defaulted date and that has been registered months after the last payment

.

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on dd/mm/yyyy.

2.The date last payment made was the dd/mm/yyyy

3.The Default Noticed was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.

4.Therefore the Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation acticon 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any true cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

5.The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

.

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

"she said they would need to send the particulars and prove the £20 payment or its statute barredlink3.gif."

 

So the court order (as per para 1 and 4 on their poc) "serve fully detailed particulars of claim". Have they followed the court order? hardly they admit the last payment was aug 2008 and then just "informal payments" with no explanation for the very thing they were asked about.

(para 3 on their poc is wrong as well you can send documents under part 7 its covered by 5.2, you can use the online as a brief summary with the details to follow.)

I would be leaning to just go for a strike-out dependent on the wording of the April order, it may be simpler to use an sb but the point of these informal payments which they were specifically asked about and couldn't answer needs addressing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SB defences...

 

 

but let andy adapt.

 

 

The following defence is all you need if it is SB

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.

.

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

.

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC] or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

..

..ends..

 

alternative whereby claimant intimates SB date=defaulted date and that has been registered months after the last payment

.

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on dd/mm/yyyy.

2.The date last payment made was the dd/mm/yyyy

3.The Default Noticed was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.

4.Therefore the Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation acticon 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any true cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

5.The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

.

 

Hey all any advice in what to write shall i write either of the above as need to get this posted today.

 

Thankyou all in advance and for what advice has been given so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2. The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.

 

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

 

Notwithstanding the above should the claimant deny the limitation,the claimant is put to strict proof to evidence any payments made after 1st September 2009 from what source and account number,sort number and payment by whom ?

 

3. The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £XXXXX or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...