HPH2/Cohen claimforn - old Barclay card debt - Now CO Threat

[AndyOrch]

If tomorrow comes and goes King and they have not complied with the directions...inform your Court and ask that a note is placed on the file and the court consider sanctions against the claimant.

 

 

Andy

[king100]

How do I do that? Letter to court should it happen.

[AndyOrch]

Letter is too slow...phone call or email

[king100]

Anything specific I should be saying?

[dx100uk]

...inform the Court and ask that a note is placed on the file and the court consider sanctions against the claimant.

[king100]

Well this is the final day and just had the post.

 

NOTHING.

 

Do I inform the court now or does it have to be the full day, I dont know maybe the letter comes via some special courier service.

[AndyOrch]

I would allow at least until Monday King.,

 

Andy

[king100]

Andy PM sent

[king100]

Witness Statement

 

Terms and Conditions

 

One more page for Terms and Conditions

 

Default Notice

 

Anything else I need to post up.

 

Also not sure why some are horizontal and some vertical.

courthoist.pdf

[AndyOrch]

So this is a 2013 agreement and yet they wish to utilise a reconstituted version for an agreement that is only 3 years old because they do not have the original.I almost lost interest once I got to Carey and section 78 yada yada yada........all very fine and dandy but this is not just a section 78 request...its a court claim in which the claimant wishes to enforce an agreement...a 3 year old agreement and they do not have the original to hand.

 

King I dont suppose you retained a copy of the original ?

[dx100uk]

T&C's are from 10/2009 too huh?

how can they have any relevance to a 2013 card?

 

 

they keep sending out those 6620000 T&C's everytime for everycard no matter what its date!!

[king100]

Morning

 

Just had a look and cannot find my original, if I remember correctly it was done online and no paperwork was ever sent for to me to sign and send back. If they did send the paperwork I never signed it and sent it back. I do have a filing cabinet and been through that with statements going back to 2013 but nothing. We keep all paperwork no matter what in a pile and file once a month, we have paperwork going back to 2008, it goes back that far.

[AndyOrch]

Can you upload a copy of the reconstituted agreement.

[dx100uk]

page 5 fwd in post 60 andy

 

 

dx

[AndyOrch]

Thanks DX.......so they dont even know it was an online application ?

[king100]

Nope, I havent filled out any applications on paper for a credit card for years.

[dx100uk]

nope certainly looks like hph2 don't..

they've made no ref to it I can see

only issuing a recon CCA that bears no resemblance whatsoever to anything we've seen regarding online BC paperwork from that era

 

 

all they've sent is a load of old stuff that going by their other BC claims

is almost identical T&C's and that silly blank agreement that BC always respond with

[AndyOrch]

Okay...I think we are all in agreement that the reconstituted is not fit for purpose and in no way is a true reflection of the original agreement.

 

When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:

 

a. must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or

b. can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?

 

It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.

 

The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act.

 

The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):

 

1. Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

2. Name and address of the debtor

3. Name and address of the creditor

4. Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.

 

Does the document signed by the debtor contain the prescribed terms for the purposes of section 61 and/or section 127(3) if:

 

a. they are on a sheet which is referred to on the piece of paper that was signed by the debtor; or

b. that sheet is attached to the piece of paper signed by the debtor; or

c. that sheet is separate from but was supplied with the piece of paper signed by the debtor?

 

If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?

If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.

 

 

The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[king100]

ok so whats the next step.

 

Are there any case studies that I can find that prove that Hoist just use the same the reconstructed agreements every time and are not actually going to find the correct information? Is that one way of looking at it?

 

What can I add my evidence in court? As i have already sent off witness statement?

[AndyOrch]

Have you not already done your standard disclosure ?

[king100]

Have you not already done your standard disclosure ?

 

If by that you mean my witness statement as I did above then yes.

[AndyOrch]

You must also provide standard disclosure with your witness statement...as per the courts directions.

[king100]

as in what I send copies of letters that they sent me ie couldent find the credit agreement letter but nothing in terms of court cases I am going rely on or evidence of them using the same reconstituted agreements in other cases.

[AndyOrch]

Yes any CCA/CPR requests and responses any document you have referred to within your defence or witness statement (exhibit)...anything you do not disclose you cant rely on or use as evidence.

 

Up to now you have only submitted an initial defence and witness statement....no evidence....standard disclosure is your written evidence.

 

Hence all the paperwork from Cohen..thats their standard disclosure.

[king100]

ok and that needs to be with the court within 14 days, what is my evidence then, all I have are letters stating they cannot find the agreement, which i sent in a copy with my witness statement.

 

What should I have sent in as my written evidence. AS I dont have that much, 1 letter saying that account on hold, another saying that they passed on my request and in process of retrieving documents, and a further 14 days to respond to claim.

 

Court Hearing is 24th Feb.

 

Yes any CCA/CPR requests and responses any document you have referred to within your defence or witness statement (exhibit)...anything you do not disclose you cant rely on or use as evidence.

 

Up to now you have only submitted an initial defence and witness statement....no evidence....standard disclosure is your written evidence.

 

Hence all the paperwork from Cohen..thats their standard disclosure.

 

Ok so that evidence that they have submitted I can therefore argue against that, but what exactly am I saying when I go in?