Welcome secured loans/charge - sold to Alpha/Prime -repo received - ***Claim Dismissed***

[cruzhughes]

What is a directions questionnaire then

[dx100uk]

what you got

wrong track forget it.

[cruzhughes]

Ok.

 

What is your/site teams honest opinion Was my defence strong enough?

 

And what about their reply to my defence?

 

I’m starting to get doubts on things now and I’m unsure how to proceed here

[cruzhughes]

Even down to the fact I had to do a defence before I got all the info from them

[dx100uk]

did you blink 1st?

or you were told too

sorry i'm remote from server

internet is down due to freezing rain on our microwave link apparently.

[cruzhughes]

I don’t get the did I blink first???

What are you on about with rest??

 

 

This bad weather is doing no good to me Cos I’m home from working and thinking and reading all sorts and doubting what I have done

[dx100uk]

ok you were told to blink 1st by the court order 16th jan...

switch off the worry chill out.

 

there are some background related to your issue I need clarification on....

let me seek that we have till the 26th.

 

the court order clearly states 'transactions'

financially wise you have had NONE with the claimant.

 

it is unclear to me if by using that word, if its meant to mean..'communications.'

in otherwords the judge is after everything the fleecers have sent to you..

 

to me they appear to have solely gone out to prove to the judge they have a valid claim...

is that really what he actually asked for,,...

 

let me seek help on a few things.

 

post 1115 which is a merge of many posts

is EXACTLY the kind of thing you need to do

 

sit tight

[cruzhughes]

I started that before you told me in 126 not to.

 

I’m in limbo. I’ve had nothing from court since they’ve replied and I feel I should be putting something together for the 26th.,

 

I’m just thinking along the lines of they don’t ave a valid claim for the repo. As the charge doesn’t link.

 

However for the monies outstanding.

 

They have provided loan agreement 984 which isn’t that legible and full statement from when welcome owned it to date.

 

They have also provided a partial statement to 661 (missing page of which I i had in the welcome sar I forwarded to you) that clearly shows the amount that was re written was the same amount as the start of further loan 984

And then more Ppi was bumped on the top.

 

If that doesn’t prove a forced rewrite for no Finacial gain to the customer but for welcomes benefit I’m not sure what does?

 

Why would this rewrite have happened?

 

The Ppi was included in the total charge for credit.

 

It says cash advance on agreement.

 

There was no cash advance.

 

The new loan settled the previous one.

 

What exactly was the purpose of this rewrite.

 

And also their agreement was signed by a totally different person in welcome than all the others

Edited March 5, 2018 by dx100uk
merged spaced

[cruzhughes]

And statement page 1 and 2 of exhibit Rp12 show nothing but fees

[cruzhughes]

Just come across something. Not sure if this is relevant but charge was dated 19/10/06 loan wasn’t disbursed until 31/10/06

[cruzhughes]

Made a start on witness statement. Let me know what you think

 

I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim of

 

The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts person in the opening paragraph.

 

1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts who are based in Luxembourg which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit RP8 by way of the Deed of Assignment

 

2. 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. Even if this loan became a regulated Mortgage contract by reasons of the Mortgage Credit Directive from 21 March 2016 Then the loan is still covered by the CCA.

 

3. On or around the 2 April 2017 I received the original claim form for possession of property from this court for the amount of £3,342.42 The claimant contends that the claim is for the sum of £3,342.42 in respect of monies owing under an alleged agreement with the account

 

4. Contained within the claimants particulars the claimant pleads that The defendant has not paid the agreed repayments of the loan and interest. and that a default notice has been served upon the defendant 17/3/2017. It does not evidence a default notice in their exhibits.

 

5.It is therefore contended that the original creditor failed to serve a valid Default Notice pursuant to section 87(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement.

 

6. On the numerous dates from March 2017 until January 2017 made many formal written requests to the Claimant requesting that the Claimant provides copies of all documents relevant to this case. Nothing was produced.

 

7. After submitting my defence to solicitors on 30th January. I finally received a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement dated 28/08/2008. Exhibit RP6. This is very poor quality. It is averred that it is very hard to read and illegible. The court is invited to try and decipher the contents and in particular the prescribed terms pursuant to section 77 CCA1974 and sec 61 (1) c of the CCA1974.

 

 

8. Claimants Exhibit RP12 shows a loan statement account no xx which started on 5/10/07 . It is meant to have 4 pages but only has 3. I provide to the court the missing page no 4 of this statement. The amount is £22,000 plus and acceptance fee of £235.00 and PPI £4506.20 the total amount of credit is £26,741.20. I respectfully ask the court to take note of all the charges and fees applied and on page 1 29/08/08 amount of £27,971.82. Which appears to be exactly the same amount on loan agreement xx. But this new agreement then has £2,307.70 added to it.

 

I would like the court to take in to account the unfairness by the original creditor welcome finance on this rewrite.

 

The FOS and FCA have been unable to help with the above as the original creditors Welcome finance have entered into a scheme of arrangement. In normal circumstances both advised they would look into the issues I have raised but their hands are tied due to the scheme.

 

The claimant has failed to show any link between the charge that was registered on 19/10/06 under loan number xx which welcome failed to removed upon settlement 3/4/2007 of the said loan number. The error lies with welcome not removing this.

 

The claimants appear to be trying to use this charge for possession. They are trying to fool the court into believing this charge is on another loan they have purchased. Loan 984 was taken 16 months after settlement 661 6 months after settlement.

 

They have failed in their reply to my defence to produce any charge notice relevant to the loan number they are litigating over so have no grounds to repossess as no charge exists.

[cruzhughes]

Figures need change on arrears owed it’s almost £6000 now

[dx100uk]

you have not been invited to file a WS.

your notes above can only be used as a skeleton argument.

[cruzhughes]

Not as yet I haven’t. But not heard anything off court either.

 

But I’m trying to get things in order in case I have to or need to clarify anything on the day with judge.

 

Is the above ok though

[dx100uk]

a debt buyer cannot issue a default notice. ...point 4.

 

use their exhibits to prove the loan number was already settled

and has no relation to the loan they at litigating upon.

 

their statement solely relates to default charges that they cant levy

[cruzhughes]

Ok thank you

 

From what I’ve been reading they shouldn’t be taking me to court either on an equitable assignment only the original creditor could gain possession???

[dx100uk]

oc sold all rights..

focus

[cruzhughes]

Explain simply please

[cruzhughes]

http://bankofinfo.com/what-is-assignment-of-mortgage/

[cruzhughes]

An assignment which does not fulfil the statutory criteria for a legal assignment. An equitable assignment may be made in one of two ways:

The assignor can inform the assignee that he transfers a right or rights to him.

The assignor can instruct the other party or parties to the agreement to discharge their obligation to the assignee instead of the assignor.

Only the benefit of an agreement may be assigned. There is no requirement for written notice to be given or received. The only significant difference between a legal assignment and an equitable assignment is that an equitable assignee often cannot bring an action in its own name against the third party contractor, but must fall back on the rules governing equitable assignments and join the assignor as party to the action.

[dx100uk]

a debt buyer cannot issue a default notice. ...point 4.

 

use their exhibits to prove the loan number was already settled

and has no relation to the loan they at litigating upon.

 

their statement solely relates to default charges that they cant levy

 

forget assignment...

 

read above quoted post...

 

concentrate on what their actual repo info states...

[cruzhughes]

Ok. Will do. They were my exhibits originally. They’ve used them too

[dx100uk]

good

lots of time don't panic

 

strip out everything that's not relevant.

 

solely concentrate and ONLY rely upon what the CLAIMANT has provided in terms of documentary evidence....

 

use THAT ONLY to disprove their claim.

 

that's ALL they can reply upon.

dx

[cruzhughes]

The repo claim or the full amount money owed arrears and outstanding balance. Or both

[cruzhughes]

You make everything sound so easy. My head is shot with it all.

 

Look at statement. There’s not that many charges on there since they purchased it. A lot have been refunded.