Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So Wageday Advance & Moneyshop as far as i am aware haven't been assigned/sold to any DCA as i'm aware so technically can be removed but piggybank as it has been sold to ACI cant, correct ?
    • ok so back to what you put up...from our guide  the last bit says...   so the answer remains as post 2 ...no. you must read things carefully...
    • Yes, had a test on Wednesday, went to work Thursday and Friday and got results on a Saturday. I informed my boss and work colleague straightaway. now came out of isolation 10days and been suspended due to a investigation.  
    • Hi Paul Yes they can terminate the account, this would be true on any loan or financial agreement regulated or not, as could the debtor.   What they should not do is demand immediate repayment, as this would be thrown out of any subsequent proceedings because there is no default.   That is what I meant by the sum is due but not payable, as there has been no reasonable repayment schedule proposed. at least, that is what I would argue. There was no break-down in any agreement ,no defaults they just closed your account. I am assuming on little facts that this is true in your case.   Having done that, they have in addition shot themselves in the foot in regards to the SB, as mentioned earlier the six years period commenced from the date on that document. Any recovery agent should drop the case immediately upon being informed of this under FCA rules.   Cheers 
    • So, to check I understand correctly. You were concerned there was a possibility you had covid, you took a test and then went back to work for the 2 days after taking the test until the point that you found out the result was positive? 
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

asset/TM legal claimform - old Lending stream PDL ***Struck Out Twice & Costs***now third claim issued


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 894 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

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

:lol: Well thats the new rules from 1st October 2017...if you dont reply you get a court claim...but your case is a bit different

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

Am i using Res Judicata for my defence again this time? And the claimant failing to follow judges orders?

Will need to enter defence soon I am going away for a week fri 29 june

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are all the claims issued to the same defendant or joint ?

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

Fine...and can you provide details of the costs awards...uploads of any court docs in connection or what you have sent to the claimants solicitor.

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

We have plenty of time..defence due 3rd July

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

The first claim I submitted a CPR 31.14 Request for the usual docs and a cca request. The claimants did not reply and they did not submit witness statement, Went to court and the outcome was.

 

OUTCOME

 

District judge B Gill

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1 the claim be struck out

2 the claimant pay the defendants witness expenses in the sum of £72.40 by 25 may 2017

 

dated 10 may 2017

 

The second claim was met with the res judicata defence and nothing from claimants no witness statements etc

It was ordered that ,

1 the case be listed for a preliminary hearing at my local magistrates court.

2 the court is considering striking out the claim on its own intiative because claimant has neither

i)explained its failure to attend trial ........... on the 10th may 2017

ii)explained its failure to comply with directions in that case

iii)confirmed that it has paid costs awarded in that case.

 

OUTCOME

 

District judge Falvey

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1 The claim is struck out under the CPR3.4(2) (b) as being an abuse of the process of court

 

2 It is recorded persuant to CPR 3.4(6) that the claim is wholly without merit.

 

3 The claimant must pay the defendants costs in the sum of £81 by the 26th of january 2018.

 

Dated 8 december 2017

 

Then the third claim arrived.

 

thanks mame

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks mame..I think I have everything now.

 

 

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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

DEFENCE

 

1. 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.It is averred that this claim is Vexatious.

 

2. The claimants claim is denied having previously issued the same claim on the 13th December 2016 and 7th July 2017 in which the claim has previously been struck out pursuant to CPR3.4(2) (b) on 25 may 2017 and 8th December 2017 at Luton county court claim numbers xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx respectively which was presided over by District Judge B Gill.

 

3 .Therefore the claimant is precluded from reissuing the same claim pursuant to res judicata and therefore the claimant is barred from re-suing a winning defendant on the same cause of action.

 

4. 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.

 

 

5. Part 20 Claim

 

5. The defendant/Part 20 claimant claims unpaid costs from previous claims pursuant to General Orders dated 10th May 2017 and 8th December 2017 respectively.

 

6. In the Luton County Court on judgment and strike outs of claim number's xxxxxxx and xxxxxx costs were awarded by District Judge B Gill.

 

 

And the defendant/Part 20 claimant claims:-

 

i) An order/judgment that the claimant do pay costs outstanding £153.40.

 

ii) £72.40 and £81.00 which remain outstanding from 25 May 2017 the 26th of January 2018 to 1st June 2018.

( 375 days and 127 days respectively) and costs in this claim.

 

iii) Interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum until judgment or payment.

  • Confused 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

the reason i ask is it says is this a counter claim and i need to pay a fee i dont mind doing that just want to make sure

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not a counter claim on mcol is it ?

 

the reason i ask is it says is this a counter claim and i need to pay a fee i dont mind doing that just want to make sure

 

Yes...its a counter claim.

 

I have added to the Part 20.....

 

i) £72.40 and £81.00 which remain outstanding from 25 May 2017 the 26th of January 2018 to 1st June 2018.

( 375 days and 127 days respectively) and costs in this claim.

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

Second time...yes your making a counter claim......a Part 20 is another name for a counter claim.

You are claiming all the costs they owe you from the previous claims.

 

Add the fee of the counter claim into the total on your part 20 claim.

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

They must be thick, greedy or both for a third attempt, would they be told to cease and desist more vexatious clams for the same alleged debt?

 

 

They certainly need a spanking over their previous defeats.

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's no harm in asking for exemplary damages in this case. I suspect that judge may be all too happy to make a point.

 

Another option would be to seek an extended civil restraint order which will prevent them from litigating this in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

oh they try every trick in the book don't they....:lol:

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...