HPH2/Cohen claimform - old Barclaycard debt***Claim dismissed***

[Singaporesmoke]

Hi Andy. Here you go.

Claimant Witness Statement P1-P4.pdf

[AndyOrch]

That only starts at point 2 as per your last upload....page 1 is required to check the intro.

[Singaporesmoke]

Page 1 is just the title page, it has the case number etc. Its here anyway.

 

Also, just so I am clear, is the issue of the DN being sent to XYZ Ltd, PO Box99.. of any value to me in respect of the DN "not being served"?

P1 1.pdf

[AndyOrch]

Thanks point 1 is the most important part of any witness statement as it lays out the authority of the person making the statement.

 

The Default Notice must be served to the known address of the agreement holder.

[Singaporesmoke]

Interesting that point on authority - own knowledge or matters of which I have been advised by the Claimant.

 

If it wasn't me in the chair I'd be thinking that if DJH turns up he wont have much to offer in terms of hard copy evidence.

[AndyOrch]

Have you any opinions on all the fluctuating figures N1 Claim Form v Witness statement ?

[Singaporesmoke]

I don't.

It looks like they don't have a firm handle on what point the DN should be assigned to a value.

 

As per a few comments above over 12 months after the DN was issued the statement shows the balance to be £7878 and I understand that once the DN is issued there can't be other charges attached.

 

What I would like to start to accumulate is the key points and work down.

E.g. is the agreement, or lack thereof, the outstanding piece of evidence that needs presenting at court.

 

Is the DN void (87 (i))? and addressed to a company (mine admittedly) at a PO box?

 

The numbers not adding up seem to be a peripheral issue,

i.e. its a few hundred adrift, so my view would be to sum up with "and the numbers are inconsistent throughout..."

[mpmmpmpmp]

According to the statement your credit limit is £8400, why did they default you at £8100 saying you must pay £400 immediately? Is that the correct Default Notice issued to you? It has no mention of terminating your account either.

 

If the figures are wrong on the Default Notice you have a very real chance of only having to pay interest even if the Judge finds in their favour regarding CCA request for whatever reason. Google Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co and have a read of that judgement.

[Singaporesmoke]

I don't know or remember TBH.

 

My recollection, vague as it now is was that this plus a Visa and a couple of others got maxed (GFC) and I missed payment dates across the board.

 

What seems odd, and something I ask for clarification on please,

is assuming I made the £402.54 payment,

does that then invalidate the DN?

 

The reason I ask is that in June 2012,

according to their copies,

the bal was £7878,

I must have paid something off it.

 

Therefore, are they not obligated to issue another DN if the first one was satisfied?

 

I have started to read Woodchester in the meantime.

[AndyOrch]

Section 69 interest has been added twice according to their Witness statement ...see point 2 and then look at the list of total at the end of the statement.

 

£335.00

[Singaporesmoke]

The interest is for the period from the original N1 to date, I believe. As for the £335.... just another example of their greed.

 

Here's another. The assignment from MK to HPH2. I have found an identical one to the one they have sent in their WS, but with a date of 1/2/16. Robinson Way was sending letters before that. Have they realised the assignment didn't happen and backdated a letter to cover it?

[dx100uk]

post 23 all the same lot sadly.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448531-Hoist-Portfolio-Buys-MKDP-Etc-Compello-Group

[Singaporesmoke]

Whilst still on the DN, I am now of the opinion that this is defective - on these points;

 

1. Addressed to the company at a PO Box - not a biggie I agree

2. Quotes s87(i) not 87(1) - perhaps they win that on the de minimus rule

3. The period for rectification is less than 14 days. The date on the Mercers ltr is 8 Aug. It doesn't state it was sent 1st class so its deemed 2nd class (I have read that) so makes the effective date of 12 Aug. Date repayment required is before 25 Aug, i.e. 24 Aug means its 12 days in total.

4. The default may have been rectified - I am looking for evidence of this

[dx100uk]

and ofcourse most mercers DN's of that period were invalid anyway

see the BC forum.

 

 

dx

[Singaporesmoke]

Morning.

 

I'm putting my defence stuff together now and have a couple of specific questions if you could give these your views.

 

1. On the T&C's if its proven that the these are false and unenforceable, does the court automatically call it to an end at that point? See the copy WS received - on their copy with my name & address on at point 2.1 it reads "fees will only be included where your agreement was entered into on or after 26 November 2010 or account was previously with Egg". As Egg didn't launch until 1998 and 2010 is 17 years after the alleged agreement it is clearly not the original or a "true" copy. I suggest it may even be fraud in them adding my details on a blank BC T&C.

 

2. If a DN is then duly "satisfied" does that set everything back to normal? I paid BC £500 in the month following the Mercer DN, defective as it was/is. So if the answer is yes, they would have to produce another DN.

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

2. If a DN is then duly "satisfied" does that set everything back to normal? I paid BC £500 in the month following the Mercer DN, defective as it was/is. So if the answer is yes, they would have to produce another DN.

 

Correct...providing you settled it within the prescribed period...14 days.

[Singaporesmoke]

It wasn't. 23 Sept was the date. No worries.

 

and your view on point1?

[AndyOrch]

Depend what DJ you get...some will look at it and deem the T&Cs are incorrect and follow the guidance of section 77/78...some wont and view it as irrelevant...depend how hard you push it.

[Singaporesmoke]

Thanks.

 

Another Q (similar) on the DN - the dates give 12 days, not 14. Is that a slam dunk non-compliance go and have drink type scenario that no ducking and diving by the litigant assistant can avoid?

[AndyOrch]

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9b5f5c10-742f-4991-a9ef-bbec639e93d0

 

In order to be compliant, the default notice must be in the prescribed form pursuant to s.88 (2) CCA and must clearly set out the debtor’s breach of the agreement and the steps which the debtor should take to cure his breach. Crucially, the debtor must be allowed at least 14 clear days in which to remedy his default before the creditor becomes entitled to take enforcement action.

[Singaporesmoke]

Ta.

 

and.... why no Termination notice for me? Any thoughts on that Andy?

[AndyOrch]

Default Notice is the termination notice...there is no such thing as a separate termination notice...if you dont pay in 14 days its terminated.

[Singaporesmoke]

Clear. Thanks again Andy.

 

If of interest, I will post my defence on here prior to Friday and let you know how it goes.

[dx100uk]

mentioned weeks ago to research mercers and faulty DN's

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=mervers+faulty+Default&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=mervers%20faulty%20Default&gsc.page=1

[AndyOrch]

Clear. Thanks again Andy.

 

If of interest, I will post my defence on here prior to Friday and let you know how it goes.

 

That would be advisable before submitting:wink: